Facebook is full of gushing sentimentality for the armed forces. There is almost a built in safeguard in the makeup of most Brits of post World War Two heritage to inhibit or prevent any form of criticism of the soldiers that came before them. There is also an argument that the actions of the soldiers allowed us in the modern day to voice their opinions in the first place.
All such arguments have been trotted out time and time again. I understand them.
What I want to know is how can those that are still enveloped in the matrix still be able to say these things and can do so with little or no sense of irony or criticism?
It is not realistic nor provable to say that there would be no freedom of speech in a world where Hitler won the war. Exactly how many individual variables are you prepared to demonstrate with non existent or presumptuous evidence before you are off on a limb of stupidity?
These things look great when a dick head says, "where's your evidence?" from a crowd. I'd like to know where his evidence is as well.
The point of World War Two and One, the Vietnam War, Saddam Hussein's weapons of mass destruction and 9/11 is that the whole thing is built on a monumental LIE.
WW1 was easy to get support for because the mainstream newspapers had a captive audience of followers. They were God fearing church goers anyway that made it a piece of cake. They were bred to believe that God was on their side and that was all there was to it. Utterly devoted to the figurehead of the state the monarch who essentially did nothing. All those poor wise men who objected to taking another man's life were discredited as cowards or simply shot by their own people as deserters. Disgraceful. Where did "Thou shalt not kill" fit into this?
WW2 was much the same as above. There was little in the way of TV or radio but the radio that was there was already being used to broadcast rousing reports of victory and propaganda that demonised one race or people against another when it suited them. The stupid citizens still ended up sniping on one another for daring to question the system in place but, hey, religion was still strong and churches still full.
As far as WW2 is concerned Germany was a broken economy and there was no way they could go from a depression to being a world dominating threat in such a short space of time without any external help. George Bush's grandfather, the late US senator Prescott Bush was amongst the key players who built up the Nazi war machine. So here we see that the USA build the enemy up to then try and knock them down.
So, I don't blame the people who join the armed forces. I feel sorry for them. They don't realise how utterly hopeless their situation is and, no, God is not on your side or anyone elses. There is no evidence of the existence of a God; Biblical, Quaranic or otherwise. What there is evidence for is that the ruling classes are brainwashing and manipulating the media, the people and the soldiers themselves to make sure that they go to their £18k a year bullet in the chest job believing that they are right and that by shooting someone else's husband or son is just a job.
This is my Poem for Remembrance day:
Never forget.
Never forget the innocent civilians who died during the wars.
Never
forget the civilians that were not killed but their lives or mental
health was destroyed by their experiences during the wars.
Never forget the people who were injured but not killed during the wars.
Most
of all, never forget that all the wars that ever were created were
created out of greed and delusion. The so called "leaders" that started
these wars were not getting their hands dirty. They were just advancing
their careers. They are the aristocratic bloodlines of old that are
completely devoid of any remorse, empathy or compassion. These
politicians and monarchs are heartless killing machines that don't give a
shit about the soldiers and their families.
So let's remember
the victims alive and dead but let's also understand that bombing our
fellow humans for any reason is unacceptable and education and awakening
from delusion is the only way to bring about peace.
Awaken! Awaken! Awaken!
Saturday 1 November 2014
Friday 7 February 2014
Why Conservatism is the Natural Way.
Greetings and thanks for tuning in.
What would the perfect world system look like? In terms of politics we have a traditional choice of the left versus the right.
In Buddhism we have the Four Noble Truths.
In nature we have survival of the fittest and natural selection, right?
The way to be true and honest to oneself is to deal in facts and testable truths; not opinion or that which can be subject to interpretation. It's only through letting go of predetermined beliefs and ideas and being open minded can we learn about or see reality clearly. The way to approach this topic is to just see.
The left wing or Communist position is that everyone is equal and is in open opposition of peoples' diversity of views, abilities and lifestyle choices. We can observe this in North Korea or Cuba. Everyone must be identical. This obviously flies in the face of the way things are in reality. Straight away we have an un-natural, artificial way of life that is in direct opposition to reality. It is from this starting point we must look at our own Labour and Liberal Democrat parties here in the UK. They are both centre-left parties. It takes a keen eye to pick out these differences when we're dealing with centre this, centre that politics.
The right wing or Conservative position is that everyone is individual and has their own personality, ideas, beliefs and abilities. We are all different. The right wing model encourages independence and self determination. The individual is at liberty to create their own success or failure through their own actions and the way they conduct themselves in the world.
In nature we can see that the animal and plant kingdom is based on the success of individual species over the environment and their rivals. There is no intervention from another artificial body that evens the balance and supposedly makes things fairer for one species over another. That would be the left wing way: Such a shame that these poor gazelles are killed and eaten by the cheetah. Let's fit the cheetah with bells so that the gazelle can hear them approaching and get away quickly! See how silly that would be? At once the natural way of things, the balance is disturbed and no longer in tune with the way things are. Is it a good thing that the gazelle gets away and the cheetah starves to extinction? What effect would artificially over populating the land with gazelles have? This tinkering with the natural order of things is quite dangerous.
In the human world the same system is at work. Survival of the fittest is the natural way of things. When we artificially boost up a weak part of society we are in direct conflict with reality. This is why the welfare state must be dramatically reformed so that only the truly deserving receive help. Those that through targeted assistance can become independent again and not reliant on the state. Keeping massive populations of the useless and economically inactive people who all crave and desire more and more food and riches is immoral and a real disservice to the taxpayers that support them.
It is indefensible to believe that we should allow this system to continue and I'll explain why:
Looking at the first of the Four Noble Truths we see that it is true that suffering exists. This is not a supernatural belief is it? Everyone is subject to suffering and dissatisfaction. There is no denying that there is not a single person or alive that has not or will never experience dissatisfaction or suffering.
The second Noble Truth is that this suffering is caused by desire and aversion. Like and dislike, grasping on to that which is not permanent or lasting. This is the natural human disposition whether we like it or not!!
When we apply this to politics in the real world we can conclude that the only way to real happiness is to find a way to alleviate this problem. How do we find lasting happiness? Ask yourself this. Based on our current understanding of observing the purity of the animal and plant kingdom and how they operate how do we achieve this? Do we see animals exhibiting gluttony and disproportionate levels of greed when compared to the others? Not usually. That would lean me to the belief that they are living correctly and in tune with the way things are and humans are not. It is very rare or perhaps never before witnessed to find an animal in the wild that is obese and consumes more than is necessary to live a normal, healthy life.
Humans always have a community spirit. They are sociable creatures by default. This has nothing to do with religious indoctrination whatsoever. The cavemen were community oriented. They also helped each other for the common good. They were compassionate in the same way as we are today. Just because somebody is a right winger doesn't make them any less compassionate or generous. It means they have a more pure and natural generosity that shines through when they see a deserving person in need. People will always donate to a worthy cause and not an unworthy cause.
The position we have in a left wing country is people that are supported by the welfare state and not encouraged to better themselves. The weak are allowed to prosper and by that I mean pull down and hinder the progress of the host country. The way to tackle this is either to a) make them so successful that they can support and fund their own thirst for riches and gadgetry or b) educate them to understand that ultimately their quest for hedonism and material possessions is misguided. It is not a problem (at least for the host country) if a rich business man lives a rich lifestyle since he is earning it by his own skills and talent. This is not an issue. But.........
Both the middle class family and the underclass family need to understand that their only path to lasting happiness is to extinguish their desires and reduce their consumption of non essential things. When you understand that cigarettes, beer or a new car do not bring any real contentment then true freedom can begin. It's ironic really. Only through letting go of things do we get true happiness. To educate yourself out of craving will deliver real happiness.
In Britain we should be allowed to be more responsible for our fellow man and the welfare state should be dismantled and converted to a charitable model. The deserving will always find a way as is true in the natural world (and we all live in the natural world whether we believe it or not!) Instead of a hardworking family being forced to contribute through taxes to the welfare system and subsidise an army of the undeserving, we should reduce taxes for the hardworking and make work and self determination pay. This is the right wing way. The left want to increase taxes on the successful working man to keep somebody else on their sofa. This is completely unfair.
The Communist system being in conflict with reality really boils down to this:
In order to make a flat socialist system work we would first have to create a population who have no sense of greed or want. Zero cravings or desire would have to exist voluntarily otherwise dissatisfaction would result out of being denied the right to better oneself or be more successful than your neighbour. A left wing system would therefore stifle competition amongst people and progress in science and medicine would be slowed down dramatically. Progress only comes when people are allowed the freedom to get creative and go where their imagination leads them.
Regarding charity and compassion this is not an on/off issue as some left leaning people will try and make out. We do not need to be forced to help someone in genuine need. A conservative country will naturally be charitable and compassionate. This is morality is built in to us from the start. You can call it moral instinct if you like. It is not planted there by religion or teaching. Even ants will carry the wounded back to the nest.
Anyway this has gone on long enough. I leave you with this thought: If communism and left wing politics was the best way for mankind why has it failed and is still failing the countries who embraced it?
Byyyeeeeeee!!!!!
What would the perfect world system look like? In terms of politics we have a traditional choice of the left versus the right.
In Buddhism we have the Four Noble Truths.
In nature we have survival of the fittest and natural selection, right?
The way to be true and honest to oneself is to deal in facts and testable truths; not opinion or that which can be subject to interpretation. It's only through letting go of predetermined beliefs and ideas and being open minded can we learn about or see reality clearly. The way to approach this topic is to just see.
The left wing or Communist position is that everyone is equal and is in open opposition of peoples' diversity of views, abilities and lifestyle choices. We can observe this in North Korea or Cuba. Everyone must be identical. This obviously flies in the face of the way things are in reality. Straight away we have an un-natural, artificial way of life that is in direct opposition to reality. It is from this starting point we must look at our own Labour and Liberal Democrat parties here in the UK. They are both centre-left parties. It takes a keen eye to pick out these differences when we're dealing with centre this, centre that politics.
The right wing or Conservative position is that everyone is individual and has their own personality, ideas, beliefs and abilities. We are all different. The right wing model encourages independence and self determination. The individual is at liberty to create their own success or failure through their own actions and the way they conduct themselves in the world.
In nature we can see that the animal and plant kingdom is based on the success of individual species over the environment and their rivals. There is no intervention from another artificial body that evens the balance and supposedly makes things fairer for one species over another. That would be the left wing way: Such a shame that these poor gazelles are killed and eaten by the cheetah. Let's fit the cheetah with bells so that the gazelle can hear them approaching and get away quickly! See how silly that would be? At once the natural way of things, the balance is disturbed and no longer in tune with the way things are. Is it a good thing that the gazelle gets away and the cheetah starves to extinction? What effect would artificially over populating the land with gazelles have? This tinkering with the natural order of things is quite dangerous.
In the human world the same system is at work. Survival of the fittest is the natural way of things. When we artificially boost up a weak part of society we are in direct conflict with reality. This is why the welfare state must be dramatically reformed so that only the truly deserving receive help. Those that through targeted assistance can become independent again and not reliant on the state. Keeping massive populations of the useless and economically inactive people who all crave and desire more and more food and riches is immoral and a real disservice to the taxpayers that support them.
It is indefensible to believe that we should allow this system to continue and I'll explain why:
Looking at the first of the Four Noble Truths we see that it is true that suffering exists. This is not a supernatural belief is it? Everyone is subject to suffering and dissatisfaction. There is no denying that there is not a single person or alive that has not or will never experience dissatisfaction or suffering.
The second Noble Truth is that this suffering is caused by desire and aversion. Like and dislike, grasping on to that which is not permanent or lasting. This is the natural human disposition whether we like it or not!!
When we apply this to politics in the real world we can conclude that the only way to real happiness is to find a way to alleviate this problem. How do we find lasting happiness? Ask yourself this. Based on our current understanding of observing the purity of the animal and plant kingdom and how they operate how do we achieve this? Do we see animals exhibiting gluttony and disproportionate levels of greed when compared to the others? Not usually. That would lean me to the belief that they are living correctly and in tune with the way things are and humans are not. It is very rare or perhaps never before witnessed to find an animal in the wild that is obese and consumes more than is necessary to live a normal, healthy life.
Humans always have a community spirit. They are sociable creatures by default. This has nothing to do with religious indoctrination whatsoever. The cavemen were community oriented. They also helped each other for the common good. They were compassionate in the same way as we are today. Just because somebody is a right winger doesn't make them any less compassionate or generous. It means they have a more pure and natural generosity that shines through when they see a deserving person in need. People will always donate to a worthy cause and not an unworthy cause.
The position we have in a left wing country is people that are supported by the welfare state and not encouraged to better themselves. The weak are allowed to prosper and by that I mean pull down and hinder the progress of the host country. The way to tackle this is either to a) make them so successful that they can support and fund their own thirst for riches and gadgetry or b) educate them to understand that ultimately their quest for hedonism and material possessions is misguided. It is not a problem (at least for the host country) if a rich business man lives a rich lifestyle since he is earning it by his own skills and talent. This is not an issue. But.........
Both the middle class family and the underclass family need to understand that their only path to lasting happiness is to extinguish their desires and reduce their consumption of non essential things. When you understand that cigarettes, beer or a new car do not bring any real contentment then true freedom can begin. It's ironic really. Only through letting go of things do we get true happiness. To educate yourself out of craving will deliver real happiness.
In Britain we should be allowed to be more responsible for our fellow man and the welfare state should be dismantled and converted to a charitable model. The deserving will always find a way as is true in the natural world (and we all live in the natural world whether we believe it or not!) Instead of a hardworking family being forced to contribute through taxes to the welfare system and subsidise an army of the undeserving, we should reduce taxes for the hardworking and make work and self determination pay. This is the right wing way. The left want to increase taxes on the successful working man to keep somebody else on their sofa. This is completely unfair.
The Communist system being in conflict with reality really boils down to this:
In order to make a flat socialist system work we would first have to create a population who have no sense of greed or want. Zero cravings or desire would have to exist voluntarily otherwise dissatisfaction would result out of being denied the right to better oneself or be more successful than your neighbour. A left wing system would therefore stifle competition amongst people and progress in science and medicine would be slowed down dramatically. Progress only comes when people are allowed the freedom to get creative and go where their imagination leads them.
Regarding charity and compassion this is not an on/off issue as some left leaning people will try and make out. We do not need to be forced to help someone in genuine need. A conservative country will naturally be charitable and compassionate. This is morality is built in to us from the start. You can call it moral instinct if you like. It is not planted there by religion or teaching. Even ants will carry the wounded back to the nest.
Anyway this has gone on long enough. I leave you with this thought: If communism and left wing politics was the best way for mankind why has it failed and is still failing the countries who embraced it?
Byyyeeeeeee!!!!!
Thursday 30 January 2014
George Orwell Will Be Right.
This morning I woke up to the news that the Labour Party want to ban smoking in cars carrying children. Straight away I picked up my iPhone. It's Facebook and Twitter time.
"I am an ex smoker but this banning smoking in your own car when driving is yet another erosion of our freedom. No, no, no!"
"If they get away with banning smoking in cars they'll be round your house setting up social services cctv monitoring your parenting and making sure you "remember to tell your kids to vote Labour.""
Now admittedly at first I misunderstood the report and thought they were saying banning all smoking in private cars. The actual report was only cars carrying children. My opinion on this is mixed. Now I don't dispute that exposing children to tobacco smoke has some level of effect on them but that's just it. I stop at 'some level.' In the same way as climate change apologists try to blame all human activity for these changes, so there is this same thing happening with smoking. They try and make it a black and white issue where it is most likely many shades of grey. I accept that smoking is harmful to health but exactly how harmful is the amount of smoke in a room in a house or a car travelling with the window open a crack?
A large percentage of adults of the age of 30 and above grew up successfully with smoking parents at home and in cars and I think any harm is minimal indeed. Is it really necessary to erode peoples' personal freedom for something that isn't really particularly harmful? This law would be more damaging to the liberty of the British people than the minimal harm it is supposed to stop. Imagine if you went to hospital with a ingrowing toenail and when you woke up they had amputated your leg just below the knee? A bit extreme, eh? That's how this proposed law feels to me.
Parents should rightly refrain from smoking in the car when children or anyone who objects is present out of compassion and courtesy. My problem is that they want to enforce it by threats of punishment. This should be advisory only. Bearing in mind that smoking goes hand in hand with rebellion I think this is yet another Labour big brother law that will do nothing to prevent somebody who already has an ignorant and selfish attitude to life. How many people do you see talking on handheld mobile phones whilst driving even though it is supposedly banned and illegal?
I remember when they banned smoking in pubs we were told that they did it in Ireland and business wasn't affected. We all said pubs would close and they said no they wouldn't. Who is right now?
If they allow these types of laws to go through eventually we will be living in an Orwellian surveillance state where there will be CCTV set up in all homes with children living there. Faceless operatives will monitor everything we do at home and vet it against government guidelines. They will promote the policy on TV saying things like:
"I am an ex smoker but this banning smoking in your own car when driving is yet another erosion of our freedom. No, no, no!"
"If they get away with banning smoking in cars they'll be round your house setting up social services cctv monitoring your parenting and making sure you "remember to tell your kids to vote Labour.""
Now admittedly at first I misunderstood the report and thought they were saying banning all smoking in private cars. The actual report was only cars carrying children. My opinion on this is mixed. Now I don't dispute that exposing children to tobacco smoke has some level of effect on them but that's just it. I stop at 'some level.' In the same way as climate change apologists try to blame all human activity for these changes, so there is this same thing happening with smoking. They try and make it a black and white issue where it is most likely many shades of grey. I accept that smoking is harmful to health but exactly how harmful is the amount of smoke in a room in a house or a car travelling with the window open a crack?
A large percentage of adults of the age of 30 and above grew up successfully with smoking parents at home and in cars and I think any harm is minimal indeed. Is it really necessary to erode peoples' personal freedom for something that isn't really particularly harmful? This law would be more damaging to the liberty of the British people than the minimal harm it is supposed to stop. Imagine if you went to hospital with a ingrowing toenail and when you woke up they had amputated your leg just below the knee? A bit extreme, eh? That's how this proposed law feels to me.
Parents should rightly refrain from smoking in the car when children or anyone who objects is present out of compassion and courtesy. My problem is that they want to enforce it by threats of punishment. This should be advisory only. Bearing in mind that smoking goes hand in hand with rebellion I think this is yet another Labour big brother law that will do nothing to prevent somebody who already has an ignorant and selfish attitude to life. How many people do you see talking on handheld mobile phones whilst driving even though it is supposedly banned and illegal?
I remember when they banned smoking in pubs we were told that they did it in Ireland and business wasn't affected. We all said pubs would close and they said no they wouldn't. Who is right now?
If they allow these types of laws to go through eventually we will be living in an Orwellian surveillance state where there will be CCTV set up in all homes with children living there. Faceless operatives will monitor everything we do at home and vet it against government guidelines. They will promote the policy on TV saying things like:
"CCTV has been proven to be one of the best sources of evidence in recent times."
"Remember folks: CCTV footage can also exonerate you from alleged crimes so it makes perfect sense to have your home monitored by our team of experts."
"If this policy saves one life it'll be worth it." - This most damaging and nonsensical phrase would then be switched back on to any protesters with this straw man argument:
"...so you are happy to see children being abused and wives beaten with their assailants getting away with it are you?? Answer me!! Are you in favour of domestic violence? Yes or no!!?!?!"
Soon there will be soundbites on television news of ordinary apathetic voters who have gotten used to their cameras in their homes. "Well, it was kinda weird at first but now we hardly notice it. Besides, if you don't do anything wrong you've got nothing to hide, have you?"
Get yourself a copy of 1984 and read it because that is where a centre left government will take you. George Orwell had a decent stab at the date but he is a lot closer to the truth than you may think.
"Remember folks: CCTV footage can also exonerate you from alleged crimes so it makes perfect sense to have your home monitored by our team of experts."
"If this policy saves one life it'll be worth it." - This most damaging and nonsensical phrase would then be switched back on to any protesters with this straw man argument:
"...so you are happy to see children being abused and wives beaten with their assailants getting away with it are you?? Answer me!! Are you in favour of domestic violence? Yes or no!!?!?!"
Soon there will be soundbites on television news of ordinary apathetic voters who have gotten used to their cameras in their homes. "Well, it was kinda weird at first but now we hardly notice it. Besides, if you don't do anything wrong you've got nothing to hide, have you?"
Get yourself a copy of 1984 and read it because that is where a centre left government will take you. George Orwell had a decent stab at the date but he is a lot closer to the truth than you may think.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)