Running Time: 01:06:01
Download: MP3 — 90.7 MB
Running Time: 01:06:01
Download: MP3 — 90.7 MB
Harrison Koehli co-hosts SOTT Radio Network's MindMatters, and is an editor for Red Pill Press. He has been interviewed on several North American radio shows about his writings on the study of ponerology. In addition to music and books, Harrison enjoys tobacco and bacon (often at the same time) and dislikes cell phones, vegetables, and fascists (commies too).
Born and raised in New York City, Elan has been an editor for SOTT.net since 2014 and is a co-host for MindMatters. He enjoys seeing and sharing what's true about our profoundly and rapidly changing world.
Adam joined the editorial team in 2014 and is a co-host of MindMatters. His particular interests include philosophy, history, exercise science, and technology. He particularly dislikes Critical Race Theory and people who're so afraid of death that they prevent others from living. He also knows kung fu.
Reader Comments
Haven't heard/watched yet but:
Reminds me of something I heard recently. CNN has their spin, Fox has their spin, and SOTT has their spin. (He doesn't really read this place.) I just said goodnight.
Gabriel I love the new avatar. Origin story? (Mine is an adolescent snow leopard I stole from online.)
R.C.
Are we ignoring the dangers of rightwing authoritarianism and overplaying the dangers on the left?Are you kidding me? Sounds like someone's never gotten around to learning of the distractionary left right distinction and the ubiquitousness of the false dichotomy fallacy.
Reminds me of something I heard recently. CNN has their spin, Fox has their spin, and SOTT has their spin. (He doesn't really read this place.) I just said goodnight.
Gabriel I love the new avatar. Origin story? (Mine is an adolescent snow leopard I stole from online.)
R.C.
Rowan Cocoan The snow leopard is awesome. I'm afraid mine is also stolen from online. The picture is from an old 90's game called Gabriel Knight: Sins of the Fathers. The nostalgia runs deep.
Gabriel Cool. I like it. Are you a redhead or 'ginger' as it's said nowadays? I am but more auburnish than that.
Thanks. RC
Thanks. RC
Gabriel I'm trying to think of a witty self-deprecatory retort but I'm blanking. Oh well.
Hang tough.
RC
Hang tough.
RC
Also, ‘Wall Street And The Bolshevik Revolution’ by Antony C. Sutton, and ‘Wall Street And The Rise of Hitler’ by the same author.
Assn9 Antony Sutton is essential reading to understand American history. I’d add his book on Skull & Bones as well.
JohnnyQuest absolutely! I would also recommend ‘Financial Vipers Of Venice’ Alchemical Money, Magical Physics, and Banking in the Middle Ages and Renaissance, by Joseph P. Farrell. It is truly eye opening. Interesting that the great financial collapse of the 1340’s immediately preceded the “Black Death” pandemic that allegedly killed tens of millions in Europe (1347-1351).
I very rarely plan my reading...I prefer books to appear, we connect, and the more abstract or unexpected the appearance, the better....but do appreciate the suggestions, Thank-you.
Breaking: The UK government admits that vaccines have damaged the natural immune system of those who have been double-vaccinated. The UK government has admitted that once you have been double-vaccinated, you will never again be able to acquire full natural immunity to Covid variants - or possibly any other virus.
So let's watch the "real" pandemic begin now! In its Week 42 "COVID-19 Vaccine Surveillance Report", the UK Department of Health admits on page 23 that "N antibody levels appear to be lower in people who become infected after two doses of vaccination". It goes on to say that this drop in antibodies is essentially permanent.
What does this mean?
We know that vaccines do not prevent infection or transmission of the virus (indeed, the report elsewhere shows that vaccinated adults are now much more likely to be infected than unvaccinated ones). The British now find that the vaccine interferes with the body's ability to make antibodies after infection not only against the spike protein but also against other parts of the virus. In particular, vaccinated people do not appear to form antibodies against the nucleocapsid protein, the envelope of the virus, which is a crucial part of the response in unvaccinated people.
In the long term, the vaccinated are far more susceptible to any mutations in the spike protein, even if they have already been infected and cured once or more. The unvaccinated, on the other hand, will gain lasting, if not permanent, immunity to all strains of the alleged virus after being naturally infected with it even once. [Link]
The first insurance companies are backing down because a huge wave of claims is coming their way. Anthony Fauci confirms that the PCR test cannot detect live viruses. Anthony Fauci confirms that neither the antigen test nor the PCR test can tell us whether someone is contagious or not!!!
This invalidates all the foundations of the so-called pandemic. The PCR test was the only indication of a pandemic. Without PCR-TEST no pandemic For all the press workers, doctors, lawyers, prosecutors etc. THIS is the final key, the ultimate proof that the measures must all be lifted immediately!
So let's watch the "real" pandemic begin now! In its Week 42 "COVID-19 Vaccine Surveillance Report", the UK Department of Health admits on page 23 that "N antibody levels appear to be lower in people who become infected after two doses of vaccination". It goes on to say that this drop in antibodies is essentially permanent.
What does this mean?
We know that vaccines do not prevent infection or transmission of the virus (indeed, the report elsewhere shows that vaccinated adults are now much more likely to be infected than unvaccinated ones). The British now find that the vaccine interferes with the body's ability to make antibodies after infection not only against the spike protein but also against other parts of the virus. In particular, vaccinated people do not appear to form antibodies against the nucleocapsid protein, the envelope of the virus, which is a crucial part of the response in unvaccinated people.
In the long term, the vaccinated are far more susceptible to any mutations in the spike protein, even if they have already been infected and cured once or more. The unvaccinated, on the other hand, will gain lasting, if not permanent, immunity to all strains of the alleged virus after being naturally infected with it even once. [Link]
The first insurance companies are backing down because a huge wave of claims is coming their way. Anthony Fauci confirms that the PCR test cannot detect live viruses. Anthony Fauci confirms that neither the antigen test nor the PCR test can tell us whether someone is contagious or not!!!
This invalidates all the foundations of the so-called pandemic. The PCR test was the only indication of a pandemic. Without PCR-TEST no pandemic For all the press workers, doctors, lawyers, prosecutors etc. THIS is the final key, the ultimate proof that the measures must all be lifted immediately!
parzival
So let's watch the "real" pandemic begin now! In its Week 42 "COVID-19 Vaccine Surveillance Report", the UK Department of Health admits on page 23 that "N antibody levels appear to be lower in people who become infected after two doses of vaccination". It goes on to say that this drop in antibodies is essentially permanent.I read pg, 23 and didn't see that ?
Good Optics "...(iii) recent observations from UK Health Security Agency (UKHSA) surveillance data that N antibody levels appear to be lower in individuals who acquire infection following 2 doses of vaccination..."
parzival A quote from MLK in the pdf: "When our days become dreary with low-hovering clouds of despair, and when our nights become darker than a thousand midnights, let us remember that there is a creative force in this universe working to pull down the gigantic mountains of evil, a power that is able to make a way out of no way and transform dark yesterdays into bright tomorrows."
While we see years characterized by continuous emergencies, yesterday economic, today health and tomorrow climatic, robots, which were initially promoted as support in large industries and then also replace numerous human roles within large industries, today are slowly and silently inserted into the daily life of society, promoted as supports for an improvement in the quality of all those services which, if carried out by the human being, can be less precise, wrong and coarse as well as being fewer than those of a machine it can actually perform in less time than a human.
Robots have a lot of added values compared to human beings.
A robot can work for a good part of the day and cost its owner a negligible amount compared to that spent on the performance of a human being;
a robot performs alone and does not complain about working too many hours;
a robot does not need to express disappointment at the fact that it receives inadequate remuneration;
a robot does not get angry if it is replaced by a more powerful robot;
a robot is faster and more precise than a human being;
a robot does not need holidays to rest;a robot does not sweat;
a robot does not get sick;a robot does not need to stop working due to pre and post pregnancy;
a robot does not suffer from love pain, the loss of a friendship or a family member;
a robot does not get distracted.
Thus robots will be purchased for all commercial activities, we will have robots that will serve with mathematical precision in restaurant tables and will be able to tell us precisely, ingredients, temperatures, history of courses and which wine we could combine: a wine that surely at that point will be the result of a productive process by robots that will improve what were previously the very limited human performance.In the same way, a text message will notify us of the imminent arrival of a quadruped on wheels, which once the entrance door is opened will be in front of it and will rise to deliver us one of our purchases made online. There will no longer be a human courier: the human courier suffers the stress of travel; a human courier if he makes an accident creates exaggerated damage, a human courier cannot mentally support the stress associated with ultra-fast delivery times:
a robot does not create all these problems.
What about humans?
Very few will observe and enjoy the perfect world they have built, many human beings will command robots and these two categories will also be the only ones who will be able to afford to go around the perfect world they have built.Another part of human beings, on the other hand, for the most part, will do what robots did at the beginning: they will be used to insert themselves between the work of one robot and the other, to do things that require conscience but obviously with equal treatment. to that of a robots that is structured to allow its survival until energy and resources are exhausted.And the remaining human beings?Human beings who do not fall into those categories will no longer be needed and most likely that day there will be so many human beings either because in the end, as many have long argued, for our Planet there are three times more human beings than in one that could allow far fewer human beings to live better.By doing so, however, we will have a very precise, perfect, controlled Planet Earth: it will all be perfectly in line because it is mathematical and because it is structured as some have deemed it right.
The fact that there will be fewer human beings at that point will not be a felt problem because those who will live that world will have little or nothing of human and those who today see as a new vision of the human future an extreme obsession of the technological transition, certainly that day they will not even be there anymore or if there will be, they will live in what one day may be the new communities of primitives.
Robots have a lot of added values compared to human beings.
A robot can work for a good part of the day and cost its owner a negligible amount compared to that spent on the performance of a human being;
a robot performs alone and does not complain about working too many hours;
a robot does not need to express disappointment at the fact that it receives inadequate remuneration;
a robot does not get angry if it is replaced by a more powerful robot;
a robot is faster and more precise than a human being;
a robot does not need holidays to rest;a robot does not sweat;
a robot does not get sick;a robot does not need to stop working due to pre and post pregnancy;
a robot does not suffer from love pain, the loss of a friendship or a family member;
a robot does not get distracted.
Thus robots will be purchased for all commercial activities, we will have robots that will serve with mathematical precision in restaurant tables and will be able to tell us precisely, ingredients, temperatures, history of courses and which wine we could combine: a wine that surely at that point will be the result of a productive process by robots that will improve what were previously the very limited human performance.In the same way, a text message will notify us of the imminent arrival of a quadruped on wheels, which once the entrance door is opened will be in front of it and will rise to deliver us one of our purchases made online. There will no longer be a human courier: the human courier suffers the stress of travel; a human courier if he makes an accident creates exaggerated damage, a human courier cannot mentally support the stress associated with ultra-fast delivery times:
a robot does not create all these problems.
What about humans?
Very few will observe and enjoy the perfect world they have built, many human beings will command robots and these two categories will also be the only ones who will be able to afford to go around the perfect world they have built.Another part of human beings, on the other hand, for the most part, will do what robots did at the beginning: they will be used to insert themselves between the work of one robot and the other, to do things that require conscience but obviously with equal treatment. to that of a robots that is structured to allow its survival until energy and resources are exhausted.And the remaining human beings?Human beings who do not fall into those categories will no longer be needed and most likely that day there will be so many human beings either because in the end, as many have long argued, for our Planet there are three times more human beings than in one that could allow far fewer human beings to live better.By doing so, however, we will have a very precise, perfect, controlled Planet Earth: it will all be perfectly in line because it is mathematical and because it is structured as some have deemed it right.
The fact that there will be fewer human beings at that point will not be a felt problem because those who will live that world will have little or nothing of human and those who today see as a new vision of the human future an extreme obsession of the technological transition, certainly that day they will not even be there anymore or if there will be, they will live in what one day may be the new communities of primitives.
Did Iain McGilchrist mention people who effectively have major parts of the brain missing and yet function quiet normally in the world, with some functioning at a genius level when they should be existing in a vegetative state, has he a theory for that.
And just a question in relation to the ‘zombie’ person and brain legions, which came first the belief or the brain lesions?
If you have one identity that being of a zombie for extended periods of time, shouldn’t the brain just degrade in line with belief eventually, at any rate the person who identifies as living dead person is probably not looking after themselves properly, are they eating brain food and getting out for a walk in the fresh air and natural stimulus for all the senses, probably not.
Although I’m not discounting brain lesions, especially for people who identify as cats, politicians, and maybe the odd scientist and those who think the great reset is a wonderful idea. Also in the long run with the ‘approved for emergency use only’ jab where the spike protein might result in brain lesions for some and the possibility of bizarre personality changes manifesting as a result.
Hope Putin isn’t vaccinated with that stuff.
And just a question in relation to the ‘zombie’ person and brain legions, which came first the belief or the brain lesions?
If you have one identity that being of a zombie for extended periods of time, shouldn’t the brain just degrade in line with belief eventually, at any rate the person who identifies as living dead person is probably not looking after themselves properly, are they eating brain food and getting out for a walk in the fresh air and natural stimulus for all the senses, probably not.
Although I’m not discounting brain lesions, especially for people who identify as cats, politicians, and maybe the odd scientist and those who think the great reset is a wonderful idea. Also in the long run with the ‘approved for emergency use only’ jab where the spike protein might result in brain lesions for some and the possibility of bizarre personality changes manifesting as a result.
Hope Putin isn’t vaccinated with that stuff.
Nada Exactly!!! (BTW, I would take any SOTTite (even the jerkest) over whoever will be our next 'leader' and that ain't even close.)
RC
RC
Found another potentially interesting book - Intellectuals , by Paul Johnson [Link]
A review:
A Review of “Intellectuals” by Paul Johnson
Intellectuals asks whether the despicable personal behavior of several influential thinkers disqualifies their far-reaching theories about how people should live. I think Johnson makes his case. Indeed, the only flaw I found in this book is that Johnson seems to overly much enjoy exposing the sordid details of his subjects.
The intellectuals examined are Jean-Jacques Rousseau, Percy Bysshe Shelley, Karl Marx, Henrik Ibsen, Leo Tolstoy, Ernest Hemingway, Bertolt Brecht, Bertrand Russel, Jean-Paul Sartre, Edmund Wilson, Victor Gollancz, and Lillian Hellman, with additional comments on others (Dashiell Hammett, Cyril Connolly, Norman Mailer, Noam Chomsky). Johnson has mostly positive things to say about George Orwell and Evelyn Waugh.
My understanding of Johnson’s definition of “intellectual” is a person who feels called, and qualified, to formulate and promote theories and schemes for “improving” the human condition, without reference to, and often in opposition to, established traditional and religious norms. To Johnson, it seems rather arrogant for a single human being, limited as we are in our ability to know and comprehend the history of human behavior, to presume to create an ultimate plan for the improvement of humankind. But it is clear that humility was in short supply in these individuals.
These are some of the subtopics listed under “intellectual characteristics” in the index to Intellectuals :
anger, aggressiveness, violencecowardicecrueltydeceitfulness, dishonestyegocentricity, egotismgenius for self-publicityhypocrisyingrattitude, rudenessintolerance, misanthropylove of powermanipulativeness, exploitativenessquarrelsomenessself-deception, gullibilityselfishness, ruthlessnessself-pityself-righteousnessshiftlessness, spongeingsnobberyvanity
One of the most beneficial aspects of this book is as a cautionary tale for those who aspire to improve the world with their ideas. The flaws of Johnson’s “intellectuals” are common to humanity. Some individuals are blessed or cursed with sufficient influence to see their schemes implemented. Very few are able to resist the abuse of this power. Reading this book, one sometimes catches glimpses of ones own darker side.
As a Christian, I am helped by the examples in this book to see the wisdom of the Gospel. Good institutions cannot create good individuals. Rather, individuals, re-created through the Gospel, can bring goodness to institutions. This path is difficult, slow, and full of messy and often painful interpersonal interactions, but it’s the only path which works in the long run. The various shortcuts devised by clever, impatient intellectuals have invariably resulted in totalitarianism, misery, and death on a titanic scale.
Here are some quotations which I found interesting:
“As the cases of Sartre and Edmund Wilson suggest, there is a common propensity among radical intellectuals to demand ambitious government programmes while feeling no responsibility to contribute to them.” p. 300“
As has been shown repeatedly, the memoirs of leading intellectuals – Sartre, de Beauvior, Russell, Hemingway, Golancz are obvious examples – are quite unreliable. But the most dangerous of these intellectual self-glorifications are those which disarm the reader by what appears to be shocking frankness and admission of guilt. Thus Tolstoy’s diaries, honest though they appear to be, in fact hide far more than they reveal. Rousseau’s Confessions , as Diderot and others who really knew him perceived at the time, are an elaborate exercise in deception, a veneer of candour concealing a bottomless morass of mendacity.” p. 302“
There followed, however, the devastating experience of the Communist Party’s purge [in Spain] of the anarchists on Stalin’s orders. Thousands of Orwell’s comrades were simply murdered or thrown into prison, tortured and executed. He himself was lucky to escape with his life. Almost as illuminating, to him, was the difficulty he found, on his return to England, in getting his account of these terrible events published. Neither Victor Gollancz, in the Left Book Club, nor Kingsley Martin, in the New Statesman – the two principal institutions whereby progressive opinion in Britain was kept informed – would allow him to tell the truth. He was forced to turn elsewhere. Orwell had always put experience before theory, and these events proved how right he had been.” p. 309“
What Orwell came reluctantly and belatedly to accept – the failure of utopianism on account of the fundamental irrationality of human behaviour – Waugh had vociferously upheld for most of his adult life. Indeed no great writer, not even Kipling, ever gave a clearer statement of the anti-intellectual position.” p. 311“
The association of intellectuals with violence occurs too often to be dismissed as an aberration. Often it takes the form of admiring those ‘men of action’ who practise violence. Mussolini had an astonishing number of intellectual followers, by no means all of them Italian. In his ascent to power, Hitler consistently was most successful on the campus, his electoral appeal to students regularly outstripping his performance among the population as a whole. He always performed well among teachers and university professors. Many intellectuals were drawn into the higher echelons of the Nazi Party and participated in the more grusome excesses of the SS.” p. 319
Regarding Russell and Chomsky:“Now it is a characteristic of such intellectuals that they see no incongruity in moving from their own discipline, where they are acknowledged masters, to public affairs, where they might be supposed to have no more right to a hearing than anyone else. Indeed they always claim that their special knowledge gives them valuable insights.” p. 339
A review:
A Review of “Intellectuals” by Paul Johnson
Intellectuals asks whether the despicable personal behavior of several influential thinkers disqualifies their far-reaching theories about how people should live. I think Johnson makes his case. Indeed, the only flaw I found in this book is that Johnson seems to overly much enjoy exposing the sordid details of his subjects.
The intellectuals examined are Jean-Jacques Rousseau, Percy Bysshe Shelley, Karl Marx, Henrik Ibsen, Leo Tolstoy, Ernest Hemingway, Bertolt Brecht, Bertrand Russel, Jean-Paul Sartre, Edmund Wilson, Victor Gollancz, and Lillian Hellman, with additional comments on others (Dashiell Hammett, Cyril Connolly, Norman Mailer, Noam Chomsky). Johnson has mostly positive things to say about George Orwell and Evelyn Waugh.
My understanding of Johnson’s definition of “intellectual” is a person who feels called, and qualified, to formulate and promote theories and schemes for “improving” the human condition, without reference to, and often in opposition to, established traditional and religious norms. To Johnson, it seems rather arrogant for a single human being, limited as we are in our ability to know and comprehend the history of human behavior, to presume to create an ultimate plan for the improvement of humankind. But it is clear that humility was in short supply in these individuals.
These are some of the subtopics listed under “intellectual characteristics” in the index to Intellectuals :
anger, aggressiveness, violencecowardicecrueltydeceitfulness, dishonestyegocentricity, egotismgenius for self-publicityhypocrisyingrattitude, rudenessintolerance, misanthropylove of powermanipulativeness, exploitativenessquarrelsomenessself-deception, gullibilityselfishness, ruthlessnessself-pityself-righteousnessshiftlessness, spongeingsnobberyvanity
One of the most beneficial aspects of this book is as a cautionary tale for those who aspire to improve the world with their ideas. The flaws of Johnson’s “intellectuals” are common to humanity. Some individuals are blessed or cursed with sufficient influence to see their schemes implemented. Very few are able to resist the abuse of this power. Reading this book, one sometimes catches glimpses of ones own darker side.
As a Christian, I am helped by the examples in this book to see the wisdom of the Gospel. Good institutions cannot create good individuals. Rather, individuals, re-created through the Gospel, can bring goodness to institutions. This path is difficult, slow, and full of messy and often painful interpersonal interactions, but it’s the only path which works in the long run. The various shortcuts devised by clever, impatient intellectuals have invariably resulted in totalitarianism, misery, and death on a titanic scale.
Here are some quotations which I found interesting:
“As the cases of Sartre and Edmund Wilson suggest, there is a common propensity among radical intellectuals to demand ambitious government programmes while feeling no responsibility to contribute to them.” p. 300“
As has been shown repeatedly, the memoirs of leading intellectuals – Sartre, de Beauvior, Russell, Hemingway, Golancz are obvious examples – are quite unreliable. But the most dangerous of these intellectual self-glorifications are those which disarm the reader by what appears to be shocking frankness and admission of guilt. Thus Tolstoy’s diaries, honest though they appear to be, in fact hide far more than they reveal. Rousseau’s Confessions , as Diderot and others who really knew him perceived at the time, are an elaborate exercise in deception, a veneer of candour concealing a bottomless morass of mendacity.” p. 302“
There followed, however, the devastating experience of the Communist Party’s purge [in Spain] of the anarchists on Stalin’s orders. Thousands of Orwell’s comrades were simply murdered or thrown into prison, tortured and executed. He himself was lucky to escape with his life. Almost as illuminating, to him, was the difficulty he found, on his return to England, in getting his account of these terrible events published. Neither Victor Gollancz, in the Left Book Club, nor Kingsley Martin, in the New Statesman – the two principal institutions whereby progressive opinion in Britain was kept informed – would allow him to tell the truth. He was forced to turn elsewhere. Orwell had always put experience before theory, and these events proved how right he had been.” p. 309“
What Orwell came reluctantly and belatedly to accept – the failure of utopianism on account of the fundamental irrationality of human behaviour – Waugh had vociferously upheld for most of his adult life. Indeed no great writer, not even Kipling, ever gave a clearer statement of the anti-intellectual position.” p. 311“
The association of intellectuals with violence occurs too often to be dismissed as an aberration. Often it takes the form of admiring those ‘men of action’ who practise violence. Mussolini had an astonishing number of intellectual followers, by no means all of them Italian. In his ascent to power, Hitler consistently was most successful on the campus, his electoral appeal to students regularly outstripping his performance among the population as a whole. He always performed well among teachers and university professors. Many intellectuals were drawn into the higher echelons of the Nazi Party and participated in the more grusome excesses of the SS.” p. 319
Regarding Russell and Chomsky:“Now it is a characteristic of such intellectuals that they see no incongruity in moving from their own discipline, where they are acknowledged masters, to public affairs, where they might be supposed to have no more right to a hearing than anyone else. Indeed they always claim that their special knowledge gives them valuable insights.” p. 339
sass Wow! Obviously a great book to deserve that great of a review! Kudos for finding it.
Then I realize that it appears that that's a review of his own book. At least he's honest about it. I admire his chutzpah.
RC
Then I realize that it appears that that's a review of his own book. At least he's honest about it. I admire his chutzpah.
RC
Rowan Cocoan , not sure if it s a great book because I haven't read it.
As an in-depth critique of the intellectual class, it caught my eye. A critique of those who have held positions of such cultural esteem for decades, as to be almost untouchable (eg: Chomsky). It might be enlightening to see on which points the author might bring them down a notch or two. Critique of this class I rarely come across.
The review states as a flaw: that the author, Johnson, seems to overly much enjoy exposing the sordid details of his subjects. Personally, I may find that insightful and entertaining.
Who is the author, Johnson, though? I have little idea apart from details on Wiki. And maybe those details only thicken the plot.
No, it's not a review of his own book..
As an in-depth critique of the intellectual class, it caught my eye. A critique of those who have held positions of such cultural esteem for decades, as to be almost untouchable (eg: Chomsky). It might be enlightening to see on which points the author might bring them down a notch or two. Critique of this class I rarely come across.
The review states as a flaw: that the author, Johnson, seems to overly much enjoy exposing the sordid details of his subjects. Personally, I may find that insightful and entertaining.
Who is the author, Johnson, though? I have little idea apart from details on Wiki. And maybe those details only thicken the plot.
No, it's not a review of his own book..
sass This 2017 paper by Paul Vereshack is germane, "War and Other Mistakes in Evolution" [Link] because from early ages we all unconsciously employed our self-defensive mechanisms of repression and associated dissociative mechanisms to survive. And because repression's work done it silently retreats leaving us with what remains of our awareness and the mechanisms thru which we lie to ourselves there ever after in manifold attempts to cover that which we've lost of ourselves with act outs that tell both ourselves and the world around us that, "I'm OK, maybe you're not but I am . . ." We become, without knowing and without conscious intent; liars.
Read the paper . . .
Read the paper . . .
sass I met Murder on the way—
He had a mask like Castlereagh—
Very smooth he look’d yet grim;
Seven bloodhounds followed him:
“‘Tis to let the Ghost of Gold
Take from toil a thousand fold,
More than e’er its substance could
In the tyrannies of old:
“Paper coin—that forgery
Of the title deeds, which ye
Hold to something of the worth
Of the inheritance of Earth.”
Percy Bysshe Shelley, from ‘The Masque of Anarchy’
He had a mask like Castlereagh—
Very smooth he look’d yet grim;
Seven bloodhounds followed him:
“‘Tis to let the Ghost of Gold
Take from toil a thousand fold,
More than e’er its substance could
In the tyrannies of old:
“Paper coin—that forgery
Of the title deeds, which ye
Hold to something of the worth
Of the inheritance of Earth.”
Percy Bysshe Shelley, from ‘The Masque of Anarchy’
Assn9 Re Frankenstein, & —another beautiful piece of social commentary using allegory.I just finally read that about two months ago. Given the societal condemnation of the nonvaxed, I would think that more than a few of us have been feeling a bit like him lately.
Thanks for the poem.
RC
Tsakoug From Stupefied Youth to Dangerous Adults. Ain't it the sad truth.
RC
BTW, I just noted - without thinking of your avatar - this:
* (with some blue) which observation I'm adding here, but the observation remains valid.
R.C.
RC
BTW, I just noted - without thinking of your avatar - this:
I have changed to my latest avatar to this: America's prettiest bird, the painted bunting - to point out yet another possible concurrent attribute of most SOTTites: some preference for golden/brown*, just like my prior snow leopard, golden eagle, short eared and other owls, et al., (et owl. ) I'm all metallic primary colors simply to point out the apparent SOTTite preference of golden/brown etc.I honestly wonder about what is behind that mega concurrency.
* (with some blue) which observation I'm adding here, but the observation remains valid.
R.C.
Rowan Cocoan According to books like "What Color is Your Personality?" earth tones denote something reliable, strong and stable. People who like to use or wear earth tones are said to respect their elders and look for peace, stability, and strength in everything.
Tsakoug Thank you! That's what I hoped for and kind of expected. I don't know why because I've always been clueless on such things but it is an interesting observation about SOTTfolk generally, and I see, more specifically, you too!
I just scrolled down the page and my painted bunting stands out like crazy which is/was my point. I probably will go back to the adolescent snow leopard soon, as that is a tough one to beat.
I have always found things like that cool and fascinating.
RC
I just scrolled down the page and my painted bunting stands out like crazy which is/was my point. I probably will go back to the adolescent snow leopard soon, as that is a tough one to beat.
I have always found things like that cool and fascinating.
RC
For the last three days, there have been no Sott.net e-newsletters coming. Is any other subscriber experiencing this?
I would personally also recommend ' This Present Darkness ' (1986) and ' Piercing the Darkness ' (1989) both written by Frank E. Peretti . It is fiction but for those who are spiritually engaged it does a great job of describing what goes unseen and what is actually happening around us every day.