Who needs cinemas when you're in the midst of a XXX-rated thriller (where no-one is allowed admittance - even at age 18)? The City of London (& its US replica - or are they one and the same?) beneficiaries have, at the cost of us serfs, been scoffing at the trough for far too long. They are so fat by now that they are more brazen than ever and all the more ugly for it.
Rant over, for now.
Thank you, Tereza, for the detailed run-down on the dynamics of their ruse.
Thank you for reading this, sue. I was thinking this morning that no one has an economic plan for small scale sovereignty that's more well researched and well thought-out than mine. I can say that without qualification because I've looked. If I'd found ONE, I never would have spent 10 years on this, which isn't really my jam!
So I'm especially happy when other women, who are not naturally wired this way, apply the dedication to understand it. We have the purpose of wanting to create spaces and relationships that nurture our children. The means of economics has been usurped by men, whose inclination is to turn everything into gambling chips, even though the word economia means mgmt of the household. So now the whole world has become tokenized for easy trading in a rigged game. Men are still trying to figure out how they can win in it. As long as women defer to men as 'knowing about money,' they won't take back their power to stop the gambling altogether.
Great book chapter! I need to revise my economics haha, I was never great at macroeconomics!
When you described the process of banks issuing a loan and balancing both sides of the ledger, is this paper/video below saying the same thing as you or suggesting that every time banks issue a loan, they create money out of nothing (which is not just the interest!)?
The author Richard Werner was the inventor of Quantitative Easing. And he talks about how it’s been misunderstood (I watched his stuff a while ago as I certainly had a negative impression of QE, and I don’t think he thinks it’s the end point but a stop gap solution if I recall). He’s also very critical of CBDCs and banking in general.
I almost spat out my tea laughing when you said “debt and taxes” being the only two things certain in life. Brilliant!!
Also love your/RFK critique of GDP. I know Eisenstein refers to our obsession with numbers as the “cult of quantity” but you may be interested to learn a fabulous lady talked about it well before him - Jane Jacobs in her book “The Nature of Economies” - and received scant credit for her work.
I'm glad I made you laugh with my 'debt and taxes' joke ;-)
Okay, you're telling me you were never great at macroeconomics and then referring me to an abstract that is exactly what I've been looking for the past 15 yrs. I'll ask you the question people often ask me, "Who ARE you?" That's rhetorical but I am deeply impressed with the breadth and granularity of your knowledge in economics. I know few who could follow this abstract or have the interest to.
I know of Richard Werner, of course, and have read some of his articles but had some skepticism because he's so deep in the banking industry and was a WEFfie YuGL although he says he's the reason they discontinued it. After reading this, I release all my reservations! No one who's controlling the opposition or offering a limited hangout would be so explicit about exactly what the problem is, how to think about it and talk about it, and how to solve it. He is brilliant!
This sums up his points: "no law, statute or bank regulation actually grants banks the right (usually considered a sovereign prerogative) to create and allocate the money supply. Further, the regulation that allows only banks to conduct such creative accounting (namely the exemption from the Client Money Rules) is potentially being abused through the act of ‘renaming’ the bank's own accounts payable liabilities as ‘customer deposits’ when no deposits had been made." He's clarified--and proven empirically--why the banks are engaged in credit creation, not even fractional reserve as I thought, and upped my estimate from 94% to 97% of the money in circulation. Eureka!
One of my principles in system change is that you want to find the easiest, lowest level change you can make. I'd already established that to take credit creation away from the banks didn't require changing the Constitution or any law, since it had never been authorized. But this says it would only require rescinding an exemption on a tiny rule within banking that's being abused. Yowza!
Sovereign prerogative, I've needed that phrase! And his point towards the end that taxes can only be paid in the credit created by banks demonstrates the collusion. Brilliant!
At the end, he talks about local banks only creating credit for production. But I think he could see the problem with that, if 97% of the money supply that backs mortgage payments suddenly disappears. Talk about an economic contraction! My plan transfers credit creation through mortgage debt to the commonwealths and preemptively distributes the credit to pay the mortgages equally to commoners to stimulate local production. Within the current banking system, ownership of the home is usurped--if it was the homeowner extending the credit in exchange for payment over time with interest, it would create no new money. The banks claim ownership of the home when they create the credit. Although I think what Richard is saying is that it's not the home but the promissory note that backs it. So maybe they don't own the home at all!!!
I am so grateful, LoWa, you pointed me in this direction.
Haha, I studied biology (ecology) and economics at university for undergrad and while I got good grades, I always found macroeconomics confusing and finance even more confusing! I was always hunting for alternative economic models and luckily I had professors who supported me in going down some interesting rabbit holes. Psychology was postgrad (sexism in intimate relationships).
I do try my best to read papers like this in the International Journal of Financial Analysis and other soporific journals (lol) because I figure someone has to wade through the “boring” finance stuff and try to make sense of it! I liked this paper in its entirety because anyone who’s done high school level accounting can understand it and the simple examples he uses in the ledger tables make heaps of sense. I listened to lots of his talks on YouTube last year - you might enjoy them too! Plus a free documentary online of his “Princes of Yen” book is worth a watch.
Yes- I also found the terminology of “sovereign prerogative “ helpful plus all the other things you noted here too!
His 2014 paper that broke the internet (apparently one of the most downloaded papers!) is a truly dense one - https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S1057521914001070 - having read it (and tried not to fall asleep ha), I think it’s easier to get people to understand the concepts via his talks online including on his Werner Economics channel (amongst others) and the other paper I linked above is much clearer in my view.
Addendum: I didn't know RW invented QE. Very interesting. Stop gap solution makes sense.
Guy Duperrault has been referring me to Jane Jacobs. SO interesting that Charles fucking Eisenstein stole her idea without credit too. Don't know if you've seen my posts on him:
I wrote down a couple of questions while reading this chapter a few weeks ago. They may not make sense, and I may just be confused, but here goes:
"[D]oes a successful economy reward its citizens with ample serf-made products, secure protection from disgruntled servants, and mobility based on service to the lords, or does it take back everyone’s right to their own labor?"
Should "take back" be "give back"? If not, I guess I don't understand what "take back" means here.
"This is everyone’s right, even when their labor serves us."
You're right about both of these--they confused me when I re-read them. Yes please change 'take back' to 'give back' in the e-book. And maybe "This is everyone's right, even when the labor of serfs serves us."
I just gave this a once over, and though much of your information is outside my domains of expertise, it dove-tails well with what I was able to get from this excellent interview of Catherine Austin Fitts by Jimmy Dore ... https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=eqidDO6T5x0
Thanks for linking that, Steve. I might give a listen and update my impression of CAF. Curiously, she just came up on another comment thread. A woman said that, even though CAF said so many things she agreed with, there was something that seemed off, where her intuition didn't resonate.
I responded that I was glad for her confirmation of my experience, but mine wasn't just intuition. Catherine is one of the few economists whose goal is community sovereignty, as is mine. I paid to attend one of her investment workshops, in order to present my plan to her. Her investment model, it turns out, is mostly gold and some ethically run small caps. When I had a chance to talk privately, she showed zero interest in my plan. And, as far as I can tell, she has no alternative plan. Her focus is on helping people with large wealth assets figure out how to preserve their advantage, for a fee.
I don't dispute the need to protect our security in the transition to a system that works for everyone. When you're commenting on her threads, Steve, you should tell her that there is a system that would accomplish her goals and recommend that she read my book. If she's as serious as I am about small scale sovereignty, she'll be interested.
That sounds like a sober assessment of her and her circles. She reminds me a bit of Chris Martenson (Peak Prosperity) in her ability to see through so much of the smoke and mirrors, and protect herself and her community.
However, the problem is that I, like most of the people I associate with here in Japan, will never be able to afford attending one of her investment workshops, let alone act on her advice or be part of her community.
And no, I have never interacted with her, and I suspect that the likes of me are not worth her time to acknowledge. Though like Chris, she is on to the sociopathic tricks closing in on us, her counter-strategies are for her socio-economic caste, and that does not include me.
Yes, Chris Martenson was the other person I was trying to think of, who also recommends gold--the mining of which has ruined the world and is still ruining the places where it stunts the growth of children with what they put in the water. I cornered him on it once and he didn't have a great answer to that.
Oh her investment workshop wasn't expensive--it's basically a sales pitch for her mgmt company. The lunch is just to get you in the door.
She's good friends with the Breggins so I don't know that she'd call the sociopathic ticks by name. The other comment thread said she just calls them 'the bankers'. Unless she's going into the sociopathic immorality of the Torah and the Talmud, she's not calling anyone out--just cowering lest she be called anti-semitic.
I empathized with them and against Robert Malone, and I generally like his socio-psychological breakdown of the predators. But two things bother me a lot, his stance on Palestine, and his own political biases.
A week or two ago, I read what looked like the beginning of a good essay on the soco-pychological pathologies of the past, https://substack.com/@gingerbreggin/p-162662863. But with this sentence ... 'It seems possible that Donald Trump is among these great exceptions to the evil ways of powerful men. I do think he might be our second George Washington in winning what is our Second War of Independence.' ... he lost all credibility to me.
have a hard enough time just remembering the history of last week in my micro-community, much less exploring the roots of the problem. But yeah ... there is a big and long-running disconnect between mankind and its role in nature. I suspect it is built into our collective gene pool and terminal to the species, but life goes on.
I agree, Steve. When I looked at 'Covid-19 & the Global Predators' to determine who they meant, I was shocked that it was everyone who opposes D. Trump: https://thirdparadigm.substack.com/p/the-breggins-and-semitism. Their essay boils down to "People with power over others are people who want power over others." Assuming that people are divided into good and evil people, or normal and sociopaths, excuses them from thinking about the systems and ideologies that we all go along with, that enable power over others.
CAF and the Breggins would like to convince you this is part of the collective gene pool and may be terminal to the species but oh well. They don't want to do the deep work of looking at how this ideology was imposed through violence and a god whose character Peter defends. It's so much easier to say, "Bad people are evil!" The system is fine as long as OUR people are in charge.
You do know someone, Steve, with a plan that does include you and the people you associate with in Japan. Instead of me learning from CAF, who doesn't have a strategy, you might recommend to her that she read my book. Peter's read at least some of it, maybe all, and told me I was a good writer, back when I was helping them with their Malone case. He could be challenged to respond to it. It would open up the conversation to what the solution is for people like you. I don't think their vague naming of 'sociopaths' (without naming names or identifying trends in their own protected tribe) is making your life any better.
This reminds me of a conversation I had with my sister yesterday. She sent me 'Follow the Silenced' (a play on words you would enjoy, I trust) and I was about half way through, when she called asking what I thought.
I said it does a great job at highlighting injured people and the unconscionable treatment they received (if they received any at all).
But, I added, it's tough to really get excited, since they are reinforcing the myth that a global respiratory pandemic happened and that there was a dangerous virus called Covid. It's reporting on real consequences that are devastating but at the same time, supporting the story that brought us those horrors.
She made the excellent point, that Micky Willis had a specific job he was doing - give voice to the voiceless - and did that. Enough to be grateful for that. Especially for the normie population who would likely find this reality-dish already difficult to digest. Has to be bit by bit. (Or bite by bite.)
I think it's the same with CAF and anyone else breaking through. They play an important part, but if you see more, it will still feel frustrating.
Where they don't go or won't go or can't go - someone else will.
"But with this sentence ... 'It seems possible that Donald Trump is among these great exceptions to the evil ways of powerful men. I do think he might be our second George Washington in winning what is our Second War of Independence.' "
That stopped me as well. This is such a tricky, maybe impossible time, because we're all using the historical references we've been given -and some of us are understanding history is often more myth and vice-versa - so our governing contexts aren't holding. How are we to communicate at all?
Well I guess we must curate our realities as we go.
Got a bit side-tracked with a late filing of taxes (whatever happened to
'No taxation without representation?) and a couple of local community projects. And although I still haven't read Tereza's book, I figure the local community thing is central to her (our) thinking.
But one problem leads to another, this time, with a solution. Next Tuesday is a book-circle discussion about a somewhat academic tome regarding the generally high standardized testing of Japanese for literacy and math — and the lack of correlation between that and general happiness or meritocracy in the work place.
I have sufficient experience to form some opinions about this topic, but the book is only available in Japanese ... and I am functionally illiterate in academic Japanese. I bought a Kindle version, thinking I would copy and paste into transcription software, only to find that the latest version of Kindle for Mac allows only the first 4 pages to be copy-pasted, and Amazon has disabled previous versions of Kindle which allowed for translations. Even through A.I. chatbots, it's taken me the better part of a weekend to find a work-around, and Tuesday is looming.
Funny ... and not ... how corporate profits comes to define technological 'progress'.
Yeah, Peter's take on Trump as a 'great exception to evil ways' threw me for a loop. I thought he was being sarcastic, but the more I read, the less I wanted to keep reading. Not that I trust the Democrat cartel any more than the Republican ... but I distinctly remember the pre-first-term pathological behavior of that self-proclaimed 'stable genius' ... and I haven't seen or heard of a trace of any radical transformation in that huckster.
And your reminder that even our historical references are likely to be on very shaky ground reminded me that we don't even need the wiles of Edward Bernays. Those narratives-as-psyops go back to before ancient Egypt. I just couldn't wrap my head around what appears to be a huge gap of cognitive dissonance in someone I had considered more intelligent and insightful than myself.
'How are we to communicate at all?'
Bingo!
That's the depth of questioning I often return to, to reign in my own intellectual hubris. Circling round to a few touchstone of experience that defy explanation ... blind to the 'meaning of meaning', much less being able to define my terms. I look down to see my legs and feet are enshrouded by metaphorical mists, yet firmly planted on ... something. I don't like to use the words 'mystic', 'spiritual', 'love', or 'god' because once 'it' is labeled, it is put on the table for appropriation and weaponization by those driven by less than noble reasons.
Who was it? Kierkegaard, or maybe Nietzsche, who used the metaphor of someone pointing to something powerful and imminent ... and yet most of us tend to get enraptured by the pointing finger, without seeing what it is pointing at. Sounds a lot like the dilemma of the inspired artist, pointing, and challenging the audience to look beyond the finger. Reminds me of your most recent post.
'We must curate our realities as we go.'
Nailed it.
Pulling ourselves up by our bootstraps.
Or that Ray Bradbury quote – “You’ve got to jump off cliffs all the time and build your wings on the way down.”
Or a logical reverse gear ... the Cheshire Cat leaving nothing but a grin.
You just reminded me of two we have in common to our Karass ... Margaret Anna Alice, down the logic-devouring rabbit-hole. And Mary.
Will pause for now and send her a message to see how she's doing.
Thanks for picking up on an otherwise fading footpath in Tereza's forest, and stopping to rest with me in the shade.
Side note re Australia FRIGHTENING Doctors with suspensions! PROOF re APRA weaponisation here to FRIGHTEN Doctors:- Great speech by Doctor My-Le Trinh at 11mins 40 secs in, caught in years of a "SUSPENSION" to practice (by APRHA "authorities") & years of their investigations (as a weapon) for prescribing perfectly safe Ivermectin for Covid/flue ...(& it was quite permissible at the time too). My-Le has had many years of safe & good results treating with IV, particularly in her time in Cambodia) ....THIS IS TO STOP non Vaccine treatments... DESPITE SAFTY & EFFICACY! WAKE UP ALL....be sceptical about "Big Pharma" et al. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=CRgHsgamirw
Why are you usurping my article for your purposes, Billy? If you continue making comments that have nothing to do with my topic, I'll have no choice but to block you.
I do know if you are aware that there is no legal requirement to pay income tax in America.
Also if America is the same as England,
where all government departments are corporations, then if there is no contract with wet ink signatures then demands for money are a frauds ; ; a version of extortion like the Mafia.
Why are you usurping my article for your purposes, David? Income tax has nothing to do with my topic. Don't change the subject. I've given plenty of material here to comment on.
Who needs cinemas when you're in the midst of a XXX-rated thriller (where no-one is allowed admittance - even at age 18)? The City of London (& its US replica - or are they one and the same?) beneficiaries have, at the cost of us serfs, been scoffing at the trough for far too long. They are so fat by now that they are more brazen than ever and all the more ugly for it.
Rant over, for now.
Thank you, Tereza, for the detailed run-down on the dynamics of their ruse.
Thank you for reading this, sue. I was thinking this morning that no one has an economic plan for small scale sovereignty that's more well researched and well thought-out than mine. I can say that without qualification because I've looked. If I'd found ONE, I never would have spent 10 years on this, which isn't really my jam!
So I'm especially happy when other women, who are not naturally wired this way, apply the dedication to understand it. We have the purpose of wanting to create spaces and relationships that nurture our children. The means of economics has been usurped by men, whose inclination is to turn everything into gambling chips, even though the word economia means mgmt of the household. So now the whole world has become tokenized for easy trading in a rigged game. Men are still trying to figure out how they can win in it. As long as women defer to men as 'knowing about money,' they won't take back their power to stop the gambling altogether.
Great book chapter! I need to revise my economics haha, I was never great at macroeconomics!
When you described the process of banks issuing a loan and balancing both sides of the ledger, is this paper/video below saying the same thing as you or suggesting that every time banks issue a loan, they create money out of nothing (which is not just the interest!)?
How do banks create money, and why can other firms not do the same? An explanation for the coexistence of lending and deposit-taking - ScienceDirect - https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S1057521914001434
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=3N7oD5zrBnc
The author Richard Werner was the inventor of Quantitative Easing. And he talks about how it’s been misunderstood (I watched his stuff a while ago as I certainly had a negative impression of QE, and I don’t think he thinks it’s the end point but a stop gap solution if I recall). He’s also very critical of CBDCs and banking in general.
I almost spat out my tea laughing when you said “debt and taxes” being the only two things certain in life. Brilliant!!
Also love your/RFK critique of GDP. I know Eisenstein refers to our obsession with numbers as the “cult of quantity” but you may be interested to learn a fabulous lady talked about it well before him - Jane Jacobs in her book “The Nature of Economies” - and received scant credit for her work.
I'm glad I made you laugh with my 'debt and taxes' joke ;-)
Okay, you're telling me you were never great at macroeconomics and then referring me to an abstract that is exactly what I've been looking for the past 15 yrs. I'll ask you the question people often ask me, "Who ARE you?" That's rhetorical but I am deeply impressed with the breadth and granularity of your knowledge in economics. I know few who could follow this abstract or have the interest to.
I know of Richard Werner, of course, and have read some of his articles but had some skepticism because he's so deep in the banking industry and was a WEFfie YuGL although he says he's the reason they discontinued it. After reading this, I release all my reservations! No one who's controlling the opposition or offering a limited hangout would be so explicit about exactly what the problem is, how to think about it and talk about it, and how to solve it. He is brilliant!
This sums up his points: "no law, statute or bank regulation actually grants banks the right (usually considered a sovereign prerogative) to create and allocate the money supply. Further, the regulation that allows only banks to conduct such creative accounting (namely the exemption from the Client Money Rules) is potentially being abused through the act of ‘renaming’ the bank's own accounts payable liabilities as ‘customer deposits’ when no deposits had been made." He's clarified--and proven empirically--why the banks are engaged in credit creation, not even fractional reserve as I thought, and upped my estimate from 94% to 97% of the money in circulation. Eureka!
One of my principles in system change is that you want to find the easiest, lowest level change you can make. I'd already established that to take credit creation away from the banks didn't require changing the Constitution or any law, since it had never been authorized. But this says it would only require rescinding an exemption on a tiny rule within banking that's being abused. Yowza!
Sovereign prerogative, I've needed that phrase! And his point towards the end that taxes can only be paid in the credit created by banks demonstrates the collusion. Brilliant!
At the end, he talks about local banks only creating credit for production. But I think he could see the problem with that, if 97% of the money supply that backs mortgage payments suddenly disappears. Talk about an economic contraction! My plan transfers credit creation through mortgage debt to the commonwealths and preemptively distributes the credit to pay the mortgages equally to commoners to stimulate local production. Within the current banking system, ownership of the home is usurped--if it was the homeowner extending the credit in exchange for payment over time with interest, it would create no new money. The banks claim ownership of the home when they create the credit. Although I think what Richard is saying is that it's not the home but the promissory note that backs it. So maybe they don't own the home at all!!!
I am so grateful, LoWa, you pointed me in this direction.
Haha, I studied biology (ecology) and economics at university for undergrad and while I got good grades, I always found macroeconomics confusing and finance even more confusing! I was always hunting for alternative economic models and luckily I had professors who supported me in going down some interesting rabbit holes. Psychology was postgrad (sexism in intimate relationships).
I do try my best to read papers like this in the International Journal of Financial Analysis and other soporific journals (lol) because I figure someone has to wade through the “boring” finance stuff and try to make sense of it! I liked this paper in its entirety because anyone who’s done high school level accounting can understand it and the simple examples he uses in the ledger tables make heaps of sense. I listened to lots of his talks on YouTube last year - you might enjoy them too! Plus a free documentary online of his “Princes of Yen” book is worth a watch.
Yes- I also found the terminology of “sovereign prerogative “ helpful plus all the other things you noted here too!
His 2014 paper that broke the internet (apparently one of the most downloaded papers!) is a truly dense one - https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S1057521914001070 - having read it (and tried not to fall asleep ha), I think it’s easier to get people to understand the concepts via his talks online including on his Werner Economics channel (amongst others) and the other paper I linked above is much clearer in my view.
Addendum: I didn't know RW invented QE. Very interesting. Stop gap solution makes sense.
Guy Duperrault has been referring me to Jane Jacobs. SO interesting that Charles fucking Eisenstein stole her idea without credit too. Don't know if you've seen my posts on him:
https://thirdparadigm.substack.com/p/charles-eisenstein-follies-and-fallacies
https://thirdparadigm.substack.com/p/eisenstein-and-the-toxic-ten
https://thirdparadigm.substack.com/p/tonic-masculinity-goes-viral
https://thirdparadigm.substack.com/p/deep-fakes-eisenstein-and-rfk
Yes of course, we had a good juicy exchange on Eisenstein a while ago and I also shared with you a comment I had posted on his substack! ❤️
Oh right!
Tereza, been binging on your videos as I clean up my flat. Wow, I always learn so much. So glad to know you!
I wrote down a couple of questions while reading this chapter a few weeks ago. They may not make sense, and I may just be confused, but here goes:
"[D]oes a successful economy reward its citizens with ample serf-made products, secure protection from disgruntled servants, and mobility based on service to the lords, or does it take back everyone’s right to their own labor?"
Should "take back" be "give back"? If not, I guess I don't understand what "take back" means here.
"This is everyone’s right, even when their labor serves us."
Does "their" refer to "serfs" here?
You're right about both of these--they confused me when I re-read them. Yes please change 'take back' to 'give back' in the e-book. And maybe "This is everyone's right, even when the labor of serfs serves us."
That sounds better anyway. Thanks Mark!
These two fixes plus your other changes are now in my copy.
Hi Tereza.
I just gave this a once over, and though much of your information is outside my domains of expertise, it dove-tails well with what I was able to get from this excellent interview of Catherine Austin Fitts by Jimmy Dore ... https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=eqidDO6T5x0
Cheers!
Thanks for linking that, Steve. I might give a listen and update my impression of CAF. Curiously, she just came up on another comment thread. A woman said that, even though CAF said so many things she agreed with, there was something that seemed off, where her intuition didn't resonate.
I responded that I was glad for her confirmation of my experience, but mine wasn't just intuition. Catherine is one of the few economists whose goal is community sovereignty, as is mine. I paid to attend one of her investment workshops, in order to present my plan to her. Her investment model, it turns out, is mostly gold and some ethically run small caps. When I had a chance to talk privately, she showed zero interest in my plan. And, as far as I can tell, she has no alternative plan. Her focus is on helping people with large wealth assets figure out how to preserve their advantage, for a fee.
I don't dispute the need to protect our security in the transition to a system that works for everyone. When you're commenting on her threads, Steve, you should tell her that there is a system that would accomplish her goals and recommend that she read my book. If she's as serious as I am about small scale sovereignty, she'll be interested.
Hi Tereza.
That sounds like a sober assessment of her and her circles. She reminds me a bit of Chris Martenson (Peak Prosperity) in her ability to see through so much of the smoke and mirrors, and protect herself and her community.
However, the problem is that I, like most of the people I associate with here in Japan, will never be able to afford attending one of her investment workshops, let alone act on her advice or be part of her community.
And no, I have never interacted with her, and I suspect that the likes of me are not worth her time to acknowledge. Though like Chris, she is on to the sociopathic tricks closing in on us, her counter-strategies are for her socio-economic caste, and that does not include me.
Yes, Chris Martenson was the other person I was trying to think of, who also recommends gold--the mining of which has ruined the world and is still ruining the places where it stunts the growth of children with what they put in the water. I cornered him on it once and he didn't have a great answer to that.
Oh her investment workshop wasn't expensive--it's basically a sales pitch for her mgmt company. The lunch is just to get you in the door.
She's good friends with the Breggins so I don't know that she'd call the sociopathic ticks by name. The other comment thread said she just calls them 'the bankers'. Unless she's going into the sociopathic immorality of the Torah and the Talmud, she's not calling anyone out--just cowering lest she be called anti-semitic.
The Breggins are so frustrating.
I empathized with them and against Robert Malone, and I generally like his socio-psychological breakdown of the predators. But two things bother me a lot, his stance on Palestine, and his own political biases.
A week or two ago, I read what looked like the beginning of a good essay on the soco-pychological pathologies of the past, https://substack.com/@gingerbreggin/p-162662863. But with this sentence ... 'It seems possible that Donald Trump is among these great exceptions to the evil ways of powerful men. I do think he might be our second George Washington in winning what is our Second War of Independence.' ... he lost all credibility to me.
have a hard enough time just remembering the history of last week in my micro-community, much less exploring the roots of the problem. But yeah ... there is a big and long-running disconnect between mankind and its role in nature. I suspect it is built into our collective gene pool and terminal to the species, but life goes on.
I agree, Steve. When I looked at 'Covid-19 & the Global Predators' to determine who they meant, I was shocked that it was everyone who opposes D. Trump: https://thirdparadigm.substack.com/p/the-breggins-and-semitism. Their essay boils down to "People with power over others are people who want power over others." Assuming that people are divided into good and evil people, or normal and sociopaths, excuses them from thinking about the systems and ideologies that we all go along with, that enable power over others.
CAF and the Breggins would like to convince you this is part of the collective gene pool and may be terminal to the species but oh well. They don't want to do the deep work of looking at how this ideology was imposed through violence and a god whose character Peter defends. It's so much easier to say, "Bad people are evil!" The system is fine as long as OUR people are in charge.
You do know someone, Steve, with a plan that does include you and the people you associate with in Japan. Instead of me learning from CAF, who doesn't have a strategy, you might recommend to her that she read my book. Peter's read at least some of it, maybe all, and told me I was a good writer, back when I was helping them with their Malone case. He could be challenged to respond to it. It would open up the conversation to what the solution is for people like you. I don't think their vague naming of 'sociopaths' (without naming names or identifying trends in their own protected tribe) is making your life any better.
This reminds me of a conversation I had with my sister yesterday. She sent me 'Follow the Silenced' (a play on words you would enjoy, I trust) and I was about half way through, when she called asking what I thought.
I said it does a great job at highlighting injured people and the unconscionable treatment they received (if they received any at all).
But, I added, it's tough to really get excited, since they are reinforcing the myth that a global respiratory pandemic happened and that there was a dangerous virus called Covid. It's reporting on real consequences that are devastating but at the same time, supporting the story that brought us those horrors.
She made the excellent point, that Micky Willis had a specific job he was doing - give voice to the voiceless - and did that. Enough to be grateful for that. Especially for the normie population who would likely find this reality-dish already difficult to digest. Has to be bit by bit. (Or bite by bite.)
I think it's the same with CAF and anyone else breaking through. They play an important part, but if you see more, it will still feel frustrating.
Where they don't go or won't go or can't go - someone else will.
"But with this sentence ... 'It seems possible that Donald Trump is among these great exceptions to the evil ways of powerful men. I do think he might be our second George Washington in winning what is our Second War of Independence.' "
That stopped me as well. This is such a tricky, maybe impossible time, because we're all using the historical references we've been given -and some of us are understanding history is often more myth and vice-versa - so our governing contexts aren't holding. How are we to communicate at all?
Well I guess we must curate our realities as we go.
Hope you're doing well, Steve.
Hi Kathleen (and Tereza),
Got a bit side-tracked with a late filing of taxes (whatever happened to
'No taxation without representation?) and a couple of local community projects. And although I still haven't read Tereza's book, I figure the local community thing is central to her (our) thinking.
But one problem leads to another, this time, with a solution. Next Tuesday is a book-circle discussion about a somewhat academic tome regarding the generally high standardized testing of Japanese for literacy and math — and the lack of correlation between that and general happiness or meritocracy in the work place.
https://www.amazon.co.jp/gp/product/B08CN5NTLK/ref=ppx_yo_dt_b_d_asin_title_351_o00?ie=UTF8&psc=1
I have sufficient experience to form some opinions about this topic, but the book is only available in Japanese ... and I am functionally illiterate in academic Japanese. I bought a Kindle version, thinking I would copy and paste into transcription software, only to find that the latest version of Kindle for Mac allows only the first 4 pages to be copy-pasted, and Amazon has disabled previous versions of Kindle which allowed for translations. Even through A.I. chatbots, it's taken me the better part of a weekend to find a work-around, and Tuesday is looming.
Funny ... and not ... how corporate profits comes to define technological 'progress'.
Yeah, Peter's take on Trump as a 'great exception to evil ways' threw me for a loop. I thought he was being sarcastic, but the more I read, the less I wanted to keep reading. Not that I trust the Democrat cartel any more than the Republican ... but I distinctly remember the pre-first-term pathological behavior of that self-proclaimed 'stable genius' ... and I haven't seen or heard of a trace of any radical transformation in that huckster.
And your reminder that even our historical references are likely to be on very shaky ground reminded me that we don't even need the wiles of Edward Bernays. Those narratives-as-psyops go back to before ancient Egypt. I just couldn't wrap my head around what appears to be a huge gap of cognitive dissonance in someone I had considered more intelligent and insightful than myself.
'How are we to communicate at all?'
Bingo!
That's the depth of questioning I often return to, to reign in my own intellectual hubris. Circling round to a few touchstone of experience that defy explanation ... blind to the 'meaning of meaning', much less being able to define my terms. I look down to see my legs and feet are enshrouded by metaphorical mists, yet firmly planted on ... something. I don't like to use the words 'mystic', 'spiritual', 'love', or 'god' because once 'it' is labeled, it is put on the table for appropriation and weaponization by those driven by less than noble reasons.
Who was it? Kierkegaard, or maybe Nietzsche, who used the metaphor of someone pointing to something powerful and imminent ... and yet most of us tend to get enraptured by the pointing finger, without seeing what it is pointing at. Sounds a lot like the dilemma of the inspired artist, pointing, and challenging the audience to look beyond the finger. Reminds me of your most recent post.
'We must curate our realities as we go.'
Nailed it.
Pulling ourselves up by our bootstraps.
Or that Ray Bradbury quote – “You’ve got to jump off cliffs all the time and build your wings on the way down.”
Or a logical reverse gear ... the Cheshire Cat leaving nothing but a grin.
You just reminded me of two we have in common to our Karass ... Margaret Anna Alice, down the logic-devouring rabbit-hole. And Mary.
Will pause for now and send her a message to see how she's doing.
Thanks for picking up on an otherwise fading footpath in Tereza's forest, and stopping to rest with me in the shade.
Cheers Kathleen
Side note re Australia FRIGHTENING Doctors with suspensions! PROOF re APRA weaponisation here to FRIGHTEN Doctors:- Great speech by Doctor My-Le Trinh at 11mins 40 secs in, caught in years of a "SUSPENSION" to practice (by APRHA "authorities") & years of their investigations (as a weapon) for prescribing perfectly safe Ivermectin for Covid/flue ...(& it was quite permissible at the time too). My-Le has had many years of safe & good results treating with IV, particularly in her time in Cambodia) ....THIS IS TO STOP non Vaccine treatments... DESPITE SAFTY & EFFICACY! WAKE UP ALL....be sceptical about "Big Pharma" et al. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=CRgHsgamirw
Why are you usurping my article for your purposes, Billy? If you continue making comments that have nothing to do with my topic, I'll have no choice but to block you.
I do know if you are aware that there is no legal requirement to pay income tax in America.
Also if America is the same as England,
where all government departments are corporations, then if there is no contract with wet ink signatures then demands for money are a frauds ; ; a version of extortion like the Mafia.
Why are you usurping my article for your purposes, David? Income tax has nothing to do with my topic. Don't change the subject. I've given plenty of material here to comment on.