The masking requirement is divide and conquer at is most base level. Just like the vaccines they split everyone right down the middle. None of this was an accident. Here is what is occurring, and we must put an end to it or it will put an end to us:
A primary tentpole of this takeover is to dumb us down to the lowest common denominator. Experienced and educated critical thinkers make for poor slaves. Our elders and their old ways of thinking have to be eradicated. Division, demoralization, and the destruction of education are three key tools in achieving total domination.
Bread (UBI/SNAP/EBT), circuses (media), overbearing propaganda (news), fabricating and dramatically magnifying our differences (5th generation warfare), and radicalizing the populace (politics) are all being brought to bear against us:
By weaponizing woke ideology, a powerful group is destroying the modern world by poisoning the wells we all share of comradery, fellowship, and family – they are doing everything they can to decimate the ties that bind us together and to destroy every trace of common ground and brotherhood between us.
Values we all once shared that were intended to do the most good for the most people are being maliciously torched in the name of discord and disunity by utilizing a reality denying, mentally ill, family destroying, child warping, depraved ideology.
The globablists’ have successfully utilized the Red vs Blue, East vs West, Vaxxed vs Unvaxxed, Masked vs Unmasked, Boy vs Girl, Gay vs Straight, Choice vs Life, Black vs White dichotomies to exploit our innate tribal nature, and in doing so are dividing and conquering us. This ‘us-vs-them’ separation makes us easy to control and direct with simple angry thoughts about “the enemy” who isn’t really our enemy – while blinding us to the actual enemy behind the curtain pulling the puppet strings. If we could collectively recognize this for what it is the NWO wouldn’t stand a chance.
Most people will not act to secure their future, so long as they feel they have an advocate fighting for them in the public or political arenas. This is why Republican vs Democrat equals divide and conquer. The human mind is binary. Our thought process can often be boiled down into terms (often ultimatums) of – this or that – and our adversaries understand - very well - the art of this war.
They know that politicization is so effective at manipulating us because most emotionally connect their personal belief system to the belief system of their political party, and so then any attack on their party – legitimate or otherwise – is interpreted by their brain as an attack on themselves. Reason and logic then jump out the nearest window as raw emotion takes the helm, thus making them even more susceptible to the predatory controlling influences.
United we will stand, divided we will fall, our adversaries know this which is why we are being mercilessly divided.
I agree 100%, except that a genuine, no-strings-attached UBI, which still does really not exist anywhere except for a form of it in Alaska (plus a few small pilot projects here and there), doesn't really belong in the same category as the other things on the list that DO have hidden and not-so-hidden strings attached. A genuine UBI is the last thing the oligarchs want, since there goes their economic coercion power over the rest of us. Otherwise, you are indeed correct.
Well, and you have divided 'globalists' and 'Woke' vs some unidentified good wise guys. Look back at our history and name one point in it when one group, especially the more powerful one, did not use ideology to oppress the other (Roman Church vs Old native religions of Europe, Americas, Africa), Capital vs Labour, patriarchs vs women, Christians vs Jews, university-affiliated pharmacist vs traditional healers, etc, etc. This is the way of the Man. His Tao.
Well, if we are unable to evolve beyond our "history" then we are doomed. But I and many others are evolving, so we are not. The next great evolutionary leap will be when we, just as the original unicellular organisms did at the dawn of life, realize that cooperating ourselves into one big organism (humanity) will make us more efficient.
I'm not trying to start a debate on a highly controversial subject, but just some food for thought...
If you really look into evolutionary theory independently as I did after about 30 years as a true believer, you will likely find that the probability of abiogenesis and mutation theory rapidly approach zero. The only scientific 'explanation' offered is "given enough time, anything can happen", which of course, isn't scientific at all.
Some starting points if you're interested in researching the subject further:
- the complexity of DNA and single celled organisms. It's mind boggling and something we cannot come close to creating today with any amount of intelligence or technology (see The Inner Life of a Cell animation produced at Harvard to observe this unfathomable complexity)
- order from disorder violates the 2nd law of thermodynamics which is accepted by all sciences but violated in only 3 instances without explanation: big bang (massive explosion to highly organized stars, planets, stable solar systems and galaxies), abiogenesis, and evolution. (entropy: everything goes from a state of higher order to lower order or organization until max entropy, absolute zero
- cellular mutation as the main driver: mutations are degenerations of DNA and have never been observed to provide an advantage, but always the opposite
- evolutionary theory says that octopi, wolves, pine trees, and humans all have common ancestors. There should be millions of fossils lying around from all sorts of bizarro failed experiments, but we still can't even find the "missing link" between man and ape.
“If it could be demonstrated that any complex organ existed, which could not possibly have been formed by numerous, successive, slight modifications, my theory would absolutely break down. But I can find no such case.” -C Darwin (biology must have been incredibly primitive in his day for the last sentence to be true to him, eg. skin, lungs, heart, wings, eyes)
"The first gulp from the glass of natural sciences will turn you into an atheist, but at the bottom of the glass God is waiting for you." -Werner Heisenberg
* I subscribe to no religion but no longer believe all the tremendous order we observe at the macro and micro levels came from an explosion followed by an infinite series of random coincidences. It violates basic physics.
Life doesn't violate the laws of physics. There is not enough space here to argue this point but many ppl much smarter than I am did it well. Life figured out the way to exist by (partially) keeping the biochemical reactions proceed at much higher temp than the environment (at a great cost, of course) and have them speed up tremendously by using catalysis (special proteins we call enzymes).
Entropy is NOT a thing; it is just a mathematical function, an abstract, don't mention it, pls. Classical thermodynamics takes a few years of devoted study to comprehend. Such concepts as 'chaos,' 'complexity,' 'order,' are also mere mathematical abstracts and cannot be used without referencing differential calculus while arguing genetics and life itself. It sounds so silly.
We do not know how often mutations actually occurred in nature over hundreds of millions of years, we can only guess. I think the theory by paleontologist and geneticist, Stephen Jay Gould, called the Punctuated Equilibrium perfectly explains evolution. You can't argue evolution did happen, right? Since you are an atheist. :)))
Not the way it is viewed in genetics, most mutations are lethal or lead to a disabling disease. Besides, think of how improbable it is for many, many organisms in a group having the same mutation simultaneously AND while they are in a reproductive age.
Actually, speaking of genetics here (haha), it is in our DNA (ours and the other pack species) to be cooperative rather than competitive. It's a natural drive, not a conscious decision. Our schooling system, and everything else in our society, is designed to overcome that innate drive.
Do you think perhaps we have both drives, and it is contextual, because in some situations, your life may literally depend on competing, but in general cooperation works best?
Very nice of you. Mazel tov! However, evolution doesn't work like that; it does not work on the level of individual organisms. Only the entire species evolves not individuals. What happens to the individual organisms is that if they do mutate to give rise to the changing of the DNA of their group--is they perish. Mutations are lethal. Sorry.
Not that I am against the reorganization of humanity into its original co-operative state--not at all! After all, I am a student of Kropotkin's. But I don't like your terminology. Nor your telling me, as a person who's very identity is imbedded into my Tribe's extraordinarily deep history, that I am not evolving.
But the thing is, we aren't individuals. It's a mind-forged illusion. Quantum reality: we are part of a unity. Just that most people don't embrace that reality. Yet.
Dear Pauline, what our mind 'forges' is not an 'illusion.' It IS the reality. Matter is multifaceted and exists on many levels of magnitude. While we, humans, only know a small part of it, just what we need to thrive in this glorious world. It is called culture; we are the only creatures who create culture. We evolved to sense this world around us TOGETHER, of course, but we are not delusional. As for the 'quantum reality'---what is it? We have absolutely no access to the subatomic world, only to a few artifacts of it. I have a degree in physics, I feel sad about this oft used 'quantum' reference to the human world--which exist on a completely different scale--it is not very useful. Let us just stick with the known, solid fact: we are a pack animal and indeed our reality is shared, we think together. Read David Graeber's last book about how we have evolved. We are fascinating, if only we can get rid of the militant psychotic Patriarchy, we will thrive again.
Luna, Re: "What our mind forges is not an illusion. It IS the reality." You can't be serious. Please consider the existence of Belief. People hold tightly, in their minds, to their beliefs about reality - which may or may not match up to other's perceptions/definitions of "reality." So, either some hold illusions, or everyone/anyone is correct about whatever they say Reality is.
...."they will be united by a nearly unbearable compassion for each other" and the land, destroyed by bombs, will regenerate, olive trees will be re-planted and peaceful communities will thrive once again.
This is SO important.. thanks for posting, Charles!
It’s a perfect demonstration of what Buckminster Fuller already knew..
“You can’t change things by fighting the existing reality. To change something, build a new model that makes the existing model obsolete” - Buckminster Fuller
I recently told a friend that maybe Jesus's admonition to turn the other cheek was about not seeking revenge. Maybe he did so to free us from acts of revenge of a tooth for a tooth? Vietnam is opening a plant in the US and negotiations are underway on how much state subsidies they will receive. Who could have imagined this 50 years ago?
Jesus' admonition to turn the other cheek was about defiance. For a grown man to be slapped on the cheek by another grown man in the days of Jesus was humiliation. You could retalliate with violence of your own, which would probably not end so well for you. Jesus was saying feel your rage, look the slapper square in the eye, and turn your head the other way as if to dare them to do it again. Jesus was a badass.
I love the badass interpretation, and agree. but I think it can easily be both, in many contexts. Defying the urge to retaliate can immediately shift the energy in a profound way, and presents the attacker with the potential to de-humanize themselves, if that 2nd slap were to occur in that moment.
I read a book by a man of the Muslim faith who wrote a book on Jesus concluding that Jesus was indeed a 'bad ass' but I agree with your interpretation. Despite going to a Catholic high school, I am completely ignorant of the Bible. I am astonished at friends who did read it because it is too obscure for me.
And in the ancient Aramaic, which we believe Jesus spoke, the word he used in that Beatitude that got translated from Aramaic to the Greek to the English meant "teachable," or "flexible." It did not mean weak, shy, retiring, obeisant given to us as "meek." It meant 𝒕𝒆𝒂𝒄𝒉𝒂𝒃𝒍𝒆. "And the 𝒕𝒆𝒂𝒄𝒉𝒂𝒃𝒍𝒆 shall inherit the land." Ain't that the truth?
Now, that sounds much more like what that Son of God, that man who taught the world, would say.
I believe there is an element of humility in the virtue of being teachable. I think that that's what Jesus might have been trying to get through to us. Think of the most intractable (𝒖𝒏𝒕𝒆𝒂𝒄𝒉𝒂𝒃𝒍𝒆) people you know. Any humility/humbleness there?
Those who stand their ground without violence or retaliation too are targets of violence. Have you ever taken a grounded, yet compassionate stance in an argument, only to have it completely enrage the other person? Sometimes choosing peace does not instantly turn the tide, shift the mood. Usually parties need to go through their own full range of emotions before they are able to really hear.
To Jesus, perhaps the afterlife was some consolation…but for all of us, perhaps the consolation is that this is the work of generations. The seeds we plant may not bear fruit in our lifetimes, but it’s worth it for even the possibility that our descendants could taste the fruit.
How can someone understand a truth that is above their level of understanding. I have never convinced anyone of anything, no matter how reasonable, no matter what facts I presented, I feel now they either come to it themselves or not.
I agree. I don’t think someone can be forced to understand anything really. We all come to realizations through our own experience and in our own time. That realization allowed me to let go of a lot of strife.
I have generally withdrawn my opinions to convince others of my point of view on those inflammatory issues, although through force of habit, I sometimes fall back into the pattern. People resent it, and often punish me covertly for my forceful viewpoints. Really, it is none of my business what people believe except when their beliefs result in mandates that put the life of my child at risk.
"I have never convinced anyone of anything, no matter how reasonable, no matter what facts I presented, I feel now they either come to it themselves or not." ditto that. However, sometimes they do come to it themselves, quietly.
He called out those who were stoning the woman for infidelity, he overturned the tables at the temple in indignant anger, he had choice adjectives for the Pharisees, but he did warn against vengeance as it poisons the heart of the bearer. The world is committed to putting out the tiniest flame of truth, via all sorts of persecutions. If that flame is not kept alive despite persecutions, eternity is lost.
A preoccupation of that time was to avoid being engulfed/jailed/killed by the occupying Roman army . So, to "meekly" or flexibly endure persecution by them was a better choice.
Before we begin interpreting "Jesus," can we remember there are so very many misrepresentations of whom he actually was and what he actually said that the effusions of that material alone makes mincemeat of the command, "Judge not, that ye be not judged"? One cannot but judge what is the appropriate sources for such judgements. It is hardly a 'course correction' for that command to be followed by, "For with what judgement ye judge, ye shall be judged." The second part becomes absurd as soon as one grasps how nonsensical it is. How many raped women could live by that? How many of us US Forever War PTS case-holders can live by it? How many of our victims could?
How many Palestinians can live by accepting forever more (a hundred plus years and counting) Zionist slaps to their whole nation's face? And why is Israel so eternally forgiven for its sins in this regard? God tells them alone to do all the slapping?
No one can predict another's reaction without fail. If we could, why did Jesus supposedly also said at the very end, "My God, why has thou forsaken me?" God did not forsake him; he chose his course in life. God gave him what he wanted. He wanted to be the world's sacrifical lamb? Had he forgotten that Abraham replied to God's command for Abe's child to sacrifice, in effect saying, "Get your own lamb to sacrifice." God obeyed.
Had Jesus also forgotten that God also tacitly agreed with Job's argument, which, in effect, demonstrated that God had no argument at all? God subsequently fell silent in the face of Job's questions for Him. For more pondering challenges with the whole monotheistic prophetic rabble, spend some time with Herbert Schneidau's brilliant study: Sacred Discontent. Then, perhaps, one can get over any notions that we know how to properly interpret divine dispensations.
William James also tried to help us out of the suppositions of our own knowing anything definitive about divine power. Ponder his brilliant collection: Varieties of Religious Experience. In other words, we must begin by separating our notions of religion (what regime of rules do we want to tie us all together?) with our notions of prophecy (what are the clearest and more reliable voices of wisdom?) Otherwise we can never settle on any path into our own effective and regenerative democracy.
If, instead of equating one with the other, we treat the rule-making amongst ourselves democratically (which necessarly means small scale only - no nation-states and no empires). Then we can find sensible opportunities to introduce tidbits of divine wisdom when the democratic deliberations become so testy as to appear near to falling apart. again, here we need for ourselves some loving divine wisdom, as the article above so lovingly illustrated. Love conquers all evil when we handle both love and judging well. Ignoring both, as today's political elites have generously embodied for longer than we want to consider here, leads to collective insanity. Or a variety of insanities.
Consider today's state and national "legislative" bodies. They may nominally welcome into their 'hearings,' but do not allow democracy to guide their final legislating process; they only welcome lobbying cabals to do that. They have effectively paralyzed all lobbying and campaign donations management so that is not an issue while it is obviously the curse of the nation! As if the US Congress's two houses were the perfect manifestations of 'democracy.' Notice no one politically categorizes the sprawling imperial Administration. Is it democracy? Obviously not. Is it plutocracy? Possibly. Is it kleptocracy? Maybe. How did it become of repugnantly imperialistic to the whole world? We do not ask this. China does. Thus BRICS. We might want to pay attention.
Seems to me that Jesus taught followers to drop their rage, not hold on to it, so their perception would not be impaired by emotion. Neither did he suggest that daring anyone to behave badly was a good idea.
Brett Weinstein did a similar take as an evolutionary biologist with Oliver Niel. Humans are very triable as part of our evolution for survival. I now see how trade helps create peace because you need to trust someone outside your group.
Beautifully written. Very timely for me as I attended a workshop 2 days ago where the expectation was that all would wear masks. The vast majority did. Only a few of us just quietly didn't. There was no confrontation, & no one asked us why we weren't going along. I love how you lay out the different stages in how this progressed for the person who did not want to mask. Very helpful.
I agree. I love this post and how Raquel/Charles laid out the different stages she went through in her decision about how to respond. And I also love your own report of quiet noncompliance. Thank you for the inspiration—reading about other people like you quietly standing firm in their own truth is empowering to me.
Thank you so much for sharing this story. Masks have begun to appear again here in England and I have noticed profound feelings in myself in response to the sight of someone doing their shopping in a mask. I have been preparing myself for the kind of scenario Raquel experienced and telling myself that come what may and whatever I may have to give up I will not comply with any mask requirements. Raquel helps me prepare my responses if I need them - Thankyou Raquel. I am remembering my several Quaker friends who were on opposite sides of the mask issue and how even in the environment of Quaker tolerance one group sat outside the meeting house in the garden while a masked and socially distanced meeting happened inside and there was one friend who just stayed away. In Raquel's dance class there was a big change in the former maskers. I wonder how that came about. I also wonder how the group would have felt if some were masked and some not? It is hard to imagine a feeling of cohesion then - more of an uncomfortable truce perhaps. I don't think masks in dance class or anywhere else is a trivial issue. Standing up or out for what I or you believe in peacefully and powerfully takes courage. Perhaps the "War on Covid" years have taught me and others a different kind of courage.
Are you talking about FMC ? That is the Quaker meeting I used to go to. I tried to speak in business meeting about how problematic masks are. I had to wear a mask to attend business meeting at all and I had to try to understand people who are speaking with a mask on. I have said in Quaker business meeting that I think masking children is child abuse. After business meeting where I spoke about how problematic masks are, no one came to speak to me and only one person tried to email me. I am now one of the people that just doesn't go to meeting. Our meeting now has half the room sitting with masks on and the other half of the room without masks. The without masks group is not supposed to sit on the other side. I have such a visceral reaction to this whole scenario that I just can't stand to go at all. So I am searching for a new spiritual home. I find the wall of silence to be the worst kind of wall of all.
Hi Rachel, My Quaker friends and my sister attend meetings in West Sussex, England. Some were stalwart rebels throughout lockdowns etc and others conformed to every edict strictly and more. I observed from the sidelines and kept talking to all of them. I was somehow particularly saddened that Quaker communities were so divided and so unable to talk about this stuff. I was able to have some deep discussions with one friend who agreed to dialogue. It was very strange how we could find common ground on most issues but on the Covid stuff it was as if we were talking different languages in spite of our best efforts. I agree with you that walls of silence are very hard to understand or to live with. I am looking for a new political home since as Charles once said "I didn't leave the left, the left left me". It is hard to lose a community. We still have so much grief to process. Go well in your search for a new home.
I want to wholeheartedly agree with the sentiment of your piece, Charles, but encounter the following blocks: your previous essay was criticised for advocating suspension of the Palestinian government, but not the Israeli government. Whatever accusations of terror and madness one may rightly level at Hamas, one must also level at Netanyahu and his war party.
You omit this in your latest essay. You go on to suggest a peace process that takes the history of all peoples into account. The history of Jews in the land we call Israel begins in 1948. The history of the Palestinians goes back much further. We have a displaced and traumatised people (the Jews) still trying to build their house, at massive and growing expense to themselves and others, "justified" by the Bible, the Jewish Holocaust, dehumanisation of the Palestinians and now the Hamas attack.
You mean well, but I am concerned that you shy away from admitting the criminal basis on which the state of Israel stands (and I believe will fall) save for comments dragged out of you by critics.
This is the exceptionalism world opinion is swinging against. When we have the Israeli ambassador telling us “there is no humanitarian crisis.” When we have a church sheltering terrified civilians shelled. When we have a hospital shelled, followed by the claim it was a Hamas rocket, backed by fabricated evidence. When we have 75 years of Israeli oppression and apartheid. When we have a million children in a concentration camp shelled...
You know all this but it is important to say it, clearly and explicitly—not to dehumanise the Israelis (they're doing a great job of that themselves)—but to address the imbalance in the way the mess is talked about. It gives world “leaders” license to perpetuate that imbalance viz. “Israel has a right to defend itself.”
A call to history to be respected must lead by example, lest the usual apply: history is written by the victors. That is the doctrine Jewish supremacists adhere to. That is the doctrine Islamic supremacists adhere to. Their call divides God and is therefore godless.
If humanitarianism is to be our god—and this is the large part of your essay I agree with—we must look unflinchingly and clinically at the facts.
Supremacist doctrine hammered into Israelis and the Jewish diaspora holds that the God of the Old Testament granted Jews the promised land. Hence the settlers uttering madness like, “I was here 2000 years ago.” Hence the ongoing ethnic cleansing and seizing of land.
A humanitarian stance cannot seek, deliberately or tacitly, to equate the tens of thousands of Palestinians killed to the thousands of Israelis killed. That would admit the non-humanitarian idea that an Israeli life is worth more than a Palestinian one.
A call to history must take in the Jewish Holocaust, which the Palestinians had nothing to do with, and the Nakba, which Jews had everything to do with. It must take in 75 years of oppression. It must take in the asymmetrical fatalities and military power, and the endless machinations of the pro Israel lobby to disguise this asymmetry and paint Israel as the victim.
World opinion—by that I mean the perception of the tragedy by the man and woman on the street, Banksy, Liverpool Football Club, Pink Floyd, the tendency of humans to support the underdog—is rapidly swinging from unequivocal support of Israel to disgust at the actions of a rogue state.
Jews who choose to live in Israel risk siding with a doctrine the licenses God's People to oppress and deceive. They must, as many are doing, stare the gift horse of that doctrine in the mouth.
Purveyors of peace must address the imbalance of that doctrine, especially when it is adopted, for entirely cynical reasons, by world powers. If we explicitly or tacitly argue for symmetry, we diminish Palestinian suffering, and leave our argument open to accusations of bias, exceptionalism and racism. Perhaps worst of all for thought leaders, such an argument lags behind world opinion.
Once again: a million children in a concentration camp. Bombed. Hospital patients. Bombed. People sheltering in a church. Bombed. The numbers. The air strikes. The incursions. The wall.
Let's acknowledge it. Let's say it. Then our arguments can have humanitarian weight. Many are calling it—Noam Chomsky, Naomi Klein, Ilan Pappe, Jeremy Corbyn. I'm not asking for a pile-on. This is not a call for mob mentality. It is a call to acknowledge what the State of Israel is founded on. Things tend to continue as they began.
We could say: all states are founded on awfulness. Take the UK. Take the US. Nations have karma. Israel's karmic equations are especially tight because the land it occupies is holy. We are witnessing the holiness of that land. Visiting mass violence on it has the power to collapse the world. Maybe that is what has to happen. Maybe we can pull out of the nosedive and admit the asymmetry loudly and clearly. Then we can look at equanimity.
Wishing you strength, clarity and good spirits in your great work.
Wow. What an example. I too have found it hard to write about anything but what is happening in Gaza at the moment. To do so feels like turning away from it, and I can't bring myself to do that. You've shown how our personal lives and this larger tragedy interweave. Thank you. But should we really call it the Holy Land? Isn't all land Holy?
Yes, and if and only if the love accepts qualititave judgements that grow the love with more acceptance of varieties of religious experiments as well as varieties of democractic judgement-settling. I.e. can we love SCOTUS for extending, even if only temporarily, the administrations blatant domestic and international violations of our own First Amendment? Do we want to include loving a convoluted version of 'democracy' that wages forever wars around the globe while financing it wherever else it wants to create headaches for others?
To love doesn't mean to agree with. It means to want the highest for them. To love a child may include discipline, or saying no. Never "anything goes."
"A cease-fire, humanitarian relief, and thousands upon thousands of peace witnesses flooding the Holy Land. Then a political process that recognizes the full history of all the people in the region, that incorporates their stories and makes room for all of them in a peaceful homeland."
And then---to continue with this wonderous dream-- we pile the evil books that teach hatred in the name of the God of Abraham (in his various guises) in the middle of a square in Jerusalem and burn them. And then we dance around that Holy Fire. And weep . . .
Indeed, a wonderful story. But is it really applicable to the situation in the 'holy land'? Not so sure. I think it is way too late; the state of Israel has murdered and displaced too many people. There had been a moment, at the very beginning, when the newcomers could have chosen to share the land granted to them, not by God but by the British Empire. But their souls were scorched by the poisons of the gas chambers. They were driven to recreate their ghettos and concertation camps, to project their historical misery onto the other, onto the people who looked so much like them.
Israelis are murdering children en mass to stay 'safe.' Right now!
God maybe dead, but we live in a moral universe. Teens who raved in the desert, enjoyed their music and each other right next door to the place of immense misery, made their moral choice. Some moral choices are quite deadly.
Go fuck yourself you idiot Christian racist. Church invented devil. "Talmud-centric?" Do you even know what you are talking about, you brainwashed anti-Semitic American ignoramus?
Thank you Charles and thank you Raquel too. This piece is very moving for me - I think I am in the grief stage of the process , deep sadness and a feeling of uselessness. But I think trying to reframe my thoughts and feelings towards the protagonists in a different way from ‘hero’ or ‘villain’ feels like good work for my heart. And gives me some small hope in the sadness.
The masking requirement is divide and conquer at is most base level. Just like the vaccines they split everyone right down the middle. None of this was an accident. Here is what is occurring, and we must put an end to it or it will put an end to us:
A primary tentpole of this takeover is to dumb us down to the lowest common denominator. Experienced and educated critical thinkers make for poor slaves. Our elders and their old ways of thinking have to be eradicated. Division, demoralization, and the destruction of education are three key tools in achieving total domination.
Bread (UBI/SNAP/EBT), circuses (media), overbearing propaganda (news), fabricating and dramatically magnifying our differences (5th generation warfare), and radicalizing the populace (politics) are all being brought to bear against us:
By weaponizing woke ideology, a powerful group is destroying the modern world by poisoning the wells we all share of comradery, fellowship, and family – they are doing everything they can to decimate the ties that bind us together and to destroy every trace of common ground and brotherhood between us.
Values we all once shared that were intended to do the most good for the most people are being maliciously torched in the name of discord and disunity by utilizing a reality denying, mentally ill, family destroying, child warping, depraved ideology.
The globablists’ have successfully utilized the Red vs Blue, East vs West, Vaxxed vs Unvaxxed, Masked vs Unmasked, Boy vs Girl, Gay vs Straight, Choice vs Life, Black vs White dichotomies to exploit our innate tribal nature, and in doing so are dividing and conquering us. This ‘us-vs-them’ separation makes us easy to control and direct with simple angry thoughts about “the enemy” who isn’t really our enemy – while blinding us to the actual enemy behind the curtain pulling the puppet strings. If we could collectively recognize this for what it is the NWO wouldn’t stand a chance.
Most people will not act to secure their future, so long as they feel they have an advocate fighting for them in the public or political arenas. This is why Republican vs Democrat equals divide and conquer. The human mind is binary. Our thought process can often be boiled down into terms (often ultimatums) of – this or that – and our adversaries understand - very well - the art of this war.
They know that politicization is so effective at manipulating us because most emotionally connect their personal belief system to the belief system of their political party, and so then any attack on their party – legitimate or otherwise – is interpreted by their brain as an attack on themselves. Reason and logic then jump out the nearest window as raw emotion takes the helm, thus making them even more susceptible to the predatory controlling influences.
United we will stand, divided we will fall, our adversaries know this which is why we are being mercilessly divided.
https://tritorch.com/united
I agree 100%, except that a genuine, no-strings-attached UBI, which still does really not exist anywhere except for a form of it in Alaska (plus a few small pilot projects here and there), doesn't really belong in the same category as the other things on the list that DO have hidden and not-so-hidden strings attached. A genuine UBI is the last thing the oligarchs want, since there goes their economic coercion power over the rest of us. Otherwise, you are indeed correct.
Well, and you have divided 'globalists' and 'Woke' vs some unidentified good wise guys. Look back at our history and name one point in it when one group, especially the more powerful one, did not use ideology to oppress the other (Roman Church vs Old native religions of Europe, Americas, Africa), Capital vs Labour, patriarchs vs women, Christians vs Jews, university-affiliated pharmacist vs traditional healers, etc, etc. This is the way of the Man. His Tao.
Well, if we are unable to evolve beyond our "history" then we are doomed. But I and many others are evolving, so we are not. The next great evolutionary leap will be when we, just as the original unicellular organisms did at the dawn of life, realize that cooperating ourselves into one big organism (humanity) will make us more efficient.
I'm not trying to start a debate on a highly controversial subject, but just some food for thought...
If you really look into evolutionary theory independently as I did after about 30 years as a true believer, you will likely find that the probability of abiogenesis and mutation theory rapidly approach zero. The only scientific 'explanation' offered is "given enough time, anything can happen", which of course, isn't scientific at all.
Some starting points if you're interested in researching the subject further:
- the complexity of DNA and single celled organisms. It's mind boggling and something we cannot come close to creating today with any amount of intelligence or technology (see The Inner Life of a Cell animation produced at Harvard to observe this unfathomable complexity)
- order from disorder violates the 2nd law of thermodynamics which is accepted by all sciences but violated in only 3 instances without explanation: big bang (massive explosion to highly organized stars, planets, stable solar systems and galaxies), abiogenesis, and evolution. (entropy: everything goes from a state of higher order to lower order or organization until max entropy, absolute zero
- cellular mutation as the main driver: mutations are degenerations of DNA and have never been observed to provide an advantage, but always the opposite
- evolutionary theory says that octopi, wolves, pine trees, and humans all have common ancestors. There should be millions of fossils lying around from all sorts of bizarro failed experiments, but we still can't even find the "missing link" between man and ape.
“If it could be demonstrated that any complex organ existed, which could not possibly have been formed by numerous, successive, slight modifications, my theory would absolutely break down. But I can find no such case.” -C Darwin (biology must have been incredibly primitive in his day for the last sentence to be true to him, eg. skin, lungs, heart, wings, eyes)
"The first gulp from the glass of natural sciences will turn you into an atheist, but at the bottom of the glass God is waiting for you." -Werner Heisenberg
* I subscribe to no religion but no longer believe all the tremendous order we observe at the macro and micro levels came from an explosion followed by an infinite series of random coincidences. It violates basic physics.
Life doesn't violate the laws of physics. There is not enough space here to argue this point but many ppl much smarter than I am did it well. Life figured out the way to exist by (partially) keeping the biochemical reactions proceed at much higher temp than the environment (at a great cost, of course) and have them speed up tremendously by using catalysis (special proteins we call enzymes).
Entropy is NOT a thing; it is just a mathematical function, an abstract, don't mention it, pls. Classical thermodynamics takes a few years of devoted study to comprehend. Such concepts as 'chaos,' 'complexity,' 'order,' are also mere mathematical abstracts and cannot be used without referencing differential calculus while arguing genetics and life itself. It sounds so silly.
We do not know how often mutations actually occurred in nature over hundreds of millions of years, we can only guess. I think the theory by paleontologist and geneticist, Stephen Jay Gould, called the Punctuated Equilibrium perfectly explains evolution. You can't argue evolution did happen, right? Since you are an atheist. :)))
Keep on thinking, it makes us human.
Ahhh, yes - but then there's those 3 pesky little violations of The Law...
I think certain mutations are adaptive and therefore spread through a species.
Not the way it is viewed in genetics, most mutations are lethal or lead to a disabling disease. Besides, think of how improbable it is for many, many organisms in a group having the same mutation simultaneously AND while they are in a reproductive age.
I thought evolutionary adaptation could be attributed to fixation of mutations that are beneficial. There are other theories though.
Carol, I think the one whole organism will need to be Life, all inclusive systems of Life itself, and not limited to just humanity.
Yes, Life is, it is doing what it has always done. It is we who have the conscious power to get over ourselves and get our act together.
In order for cooperation to work and it is more efficient than competition, the majority of the group needs to have that mentality.
Actually, speaking of genetics here (haha), it is in our DNA (ours and the other pack species) to be cooperative rather than competitive. It's a natural drive, not a conscious decision. Our schooling system, and everything else in our society, is designed to overcome that innate drive.
Do you think perhaps we have both drives, and it is contextual, because in some situations, your life may literally depend on competing, but in general cooperation works best?
Very nice of you. Mazel tov! However, evolution doesn't work like that; it does not work on the level of individual organisms. Only the entire species evolves not individuals. What happens to the individual organisms is that if they do mutate to give rise to the changing of the DNA of their group--is they perish. Mutations are lethal. Sorry.
Not that I am against the reorganization of humanity into its original co-operative state--not at all! After all, I am a student of Kropotkin's. But I don't like your terminology. Nor your telling me, as a person who's very identity is imbedded into my Tribe's extraordinarily deep history, that I am not evolving.
But the thing is, we aren't individuals. It's a mind-forged illusion. Quantum reality: we are part of a unity. Just that most people don't embrace that reality. Yet.
Our bodies are separate, we are all part of once consciousness.
Dear Pauline, what our mind 'forges' is not an 'illusion.' It IS the reality. Matter is multifaceted and exists on many levels of magnitude. While we, humans, only know a small part of it, just what we need to thrive in this glorious world. It is called culture; we are the only creatures who create culture. We evolved to sense this world around us TOGETHER, of course, but we are not delusional. As for the 'quantum reality'---what is it? We have absolutely no access to the subatomic world, only to a few artifacts of it. I have a degree in physics, I feel sad about this oft used 'quantum' reference to the human world--which exist on a completely different scale--it is not very useful. Let us just stick with the known, solid fact: we are a pack animal and indeed our reality is shared, we think together. Read David Graeber's last book about how we have evolved. We are fascinating, if only we can get rid of the militant psychotic Patriarchy, we will thrive again.
Luna, Re: "What our mind forges is not an illusion. It IS the reality." You can't be serious. Please consider the existence of Belief. People hold tightly, in their minds, to their beliefs about reality - which may or may not match up to other's perceptions/definitions of "reality." So, either some hold illusions, or everyone/anyone is correct about whatever they say Reality is.
🙄
...."they will be united by a nearly unbearable compassion for each other" and the land, destroyed by bombs, will regenerate, olive trees will be re-planted and peaceful communities will thrive once again.
Amen
This is SO important.. thanks for posting, Charles!
It’s a perfect demonstration of what Buckminster Fuller already knew..
“You can’t change things by fighting the existing reality. To change something, build a new model that makes the existing model obsolete” - Buckminster Fuller
I recently told a friend that maybe Jesus's admonition to turn the other cheek was about not seeking revenge. Maybe he did so to free us from acts of revenge of a tooth for a tooth? Vietnam is opening a plant in the US and negotiations are underway on how much state subsidies they will receive. Who could have imagined this 50 years ago?
Jesus' admonition to turn the other cheek was about defiance. For a grown man to be slapped on the cheek by another grown man in the days of Jesus was humiliation. You could retalliate with violence of your own, which would probably not end so well for you. Jesus was saying feel your rage, look the slapper square in the eye, and turn your head the other way as if to dare them to do it again. Jesus was a badass.
I love the badass interpretation, and agree. but I think it can easily be both, in many contexts. Defying the urge to retaliate can immediately shift the energy in a profound way, and presents the attacker with the potential to de-humanize themselves, if that 2nd slap were to occur in that moment.
I read a book by a man of the Muslim faith who wrote a book on Jesus concluding that Jesus was indeed a 'bad ass' but I agree with your interpretation. Despite going to a Catholic high school, I am completely ignorant of the Bible. I am astonished at friends who did read it because it is too obscure for me.
It wasn't defiance. He said "blessed are the meek".
Jesus taught disciples to endure persecution because they'd be rewarded in heaven. Small consolation for a lifetime of abuse.
And in the ancient Aramaic, which we believe Jesus spoke, the word he used in that Beatitude that got translated from Aramaic to the Greek to the English meant "teachable," or "flexible." It did not mean weak, shy, retiring, obeisant given to us as "meek." It meant 𝒕𝒆𝒂𝒄𝒉𝒂𝒃𝒍𝒆. "And the 𝒕𝒆𝒂𝒄𝒉𝒂𝒃𝒍𝒆 shall inherit the land." Ain't that the truth?
Now, that sounds much more like what that Son of God, that man who taught the world, would say.
That is very interesting. And again, to be open. If you are closed off, you cannot learn. I definitely include myself here.
I believe there is an element of humility in the virtue of being teachable. I think that that's what Jesus might have been trying to get through to us. Think of the most intractable (𝒖𝒏𝒕𝒆𝒂𝒄𝒉𝒂𝒃𝒍𝒆) people you know. Any humility/humbleness there?
Hah that’s a tough one 😉
Those who stand their ground without violence or retaliation too are targets of violence. Have you ever taken a grounded, yet compassionate stance in an argument, only to have it completely enrage the other person? Sometimes choosing peace does not instantly turn the tide, shift the mood. Usually parties need to go through their own full range of emotions before they are able to really hear.
To Jesus, perhaps the afterlife was some consolation…but for all of us, perhaps the consolation is that this is the work of generations. The seeds we plant may not bear fruit in our lifetimes, but it’s worth it for even the possibility that our descendants could taste the fruit.
How can someone understand a truth that is above their level of understanding. I have never convinced anyone of anything, no matter how reasonable, no matter what facts I presented, I feel now they either come to it themselves or not.
I agree. I don’t think someone can be forced to understand anything really. We all come to realizations through our own experience and in our own time. That realization allowed me to let go of a lot of strife.
I have generally withdrawn my opinions to convince others of my point of view on those inflammatory issues, although through force of habit, I sometimes fall back into the pattern. People resent it, and often punish me covertly for my forceful viewpoints. Really, it is none of my business what people believe except when their beliefs result in mandates that put the life of my child at risk.
"I have never convinced anyone of anything, no matter how reasonable, no matter what facts I presented, I feel now they either come to it themselves or not." ditto that. However, sometimes they do come to it themselves, quietly.
I'd say it's worth it, even if there's no possibility that our descendants will benefit. Even if there are no more descendants.
If the only way to motivate us to do the right thing relies on manufacturing hope, we stand on shaky ground.
I don’t know that I’d call it manufacturing hope. I think there is always hope and I don’t think it’s wrong to lean on it.
He called out those who were stoning the woman for infidelity, he overturned the tables at the temple in indignant anger, he had choice adjectives for the Pharisees, but he did warn against vengeance as it poisons the heart of the bearer. The world is committed to putting out the tiniest flame of truth, via all sorts of persecutions. If that flame is not kept alive despite persecutions, eternity is lost.
That was the male dominated christian church’s interpretation of his teachings.
A preoccupation of that time was to avoid being engulfed/jailed/killed by the occupying Roman army . So, to "meekly" or flexibly endure persecution by them was a better choice.
Before we begin interpreting "Jesus," can we remember there are so very many misrepresentations of whom he actually was and what he actually said that the effusions of that material alone makes mincemeat of the command, "Judge not, that ye be not judged"? One cannot but judge what is the appropriate sources for such judgements. It is hardly a 'course correction' for that command to be followed by, "For with what judgement ye judge, ye shall be judged." The second part becomes absurd as soon as one grasps how nonsensical it is. How many raped women could live by that? How many of us US Forever War PTS case-holders can live by it? How many of our victims could?
How many Palestinians can live by accepting forever more (a hundred plus years and counting) Zionist slaps to their whole nation's face? And why is Israel so eternally forgiven for its sins in this regard? God tells them alone to do all the slapping?
No one can predict another's reaction without fail. If we could, why did Jesus supposedly also said at the very end, "My God, why has thou forsaken me?" God did not forsake him; he chose his course in life. God gave him what he wanted. He wanted to be the world's sacrifical lamb? Had he forgotten that Abraham replied to God's command for Abe's child to sacrifice, in effect saying, "Get your own lamb to sacrifice." God obeyed.
Had Jesus also forgotten that God also tacitly agreed with Job's argument, which, in effect, demonstrated that God had no argument at all? God subsequently fell silent in the face of Job's questions for Him. For more pondering challenges with the whole monotheistic prophetic rabble, spend some time with Herbert Schneidau's brilliant study: Sacred Discontent. Then, perhaps, one can get over any notions that we know how to properly interpret divine dispensations.
William James also tried to help us out of the suppositions of our own knowing anything definitive about divine power. Ponder his brilliant collection: Varieties of Religious Experience. In other words, we must begin by separating our notions of religion (what regime of rules do we want to tie us all together?) with our notions of prophecy (what are the clearest and more reliable voices of wisdom?) Otherwise we can never settle on any path into our own effective and regenerative democracy.
If, instead of equating one with the other, we treat the rule-making amongst ourselves democratically (which necessarly means small scale only - no nation-states and no empires). Then we can find sensible opportunities to introduce tidbits of divine wisdom when the democratic deliberations become so testy as to appear near to falling apart. again, here we need for ourselves some loving divine wisdom, as the article above so lovingly illustrated. Love conquers all evil when we handle both love and judging well. Ignoring both, as today's political elites have generously embodied for longer than we want to consider here, leads to collective insanity. Or a variety of insanities.
Consider today's state and national "legislative" bodies. They may nominally welcome into their 'hearings,' but do not allow democracy to guide their final legislating process; they only welcome lobbying cabals to do that. They have effectively paralyzed all lobbying and campaign donations management so that is not an issue while it is obviously the curse of the nation! As if the US Congress's two houses were the perfect manifestations of 'democracy.' Notice no one politically categorizes the sprawling imperial Administration. Is it democracy? Obviously not. Is it plutocracy? Possibly. Is it kleptocracy? Maybe. How did it become of repugnantly imperialistic to the whole world? We do not ask this. China does. Thus BRICS. We might want to pay attention.
Too bad he was just a fantasy, we so could've used a badass God right now.
Seems to me that Jesus taught followers to drop their rage, not hold on to it, so their perception would not be impaired by emotion. Neither did he suggest that daring anyone to behave badly was a good idea.
Jesus also though told his apostles to take swords with them for protection. He also expected us to judge others, but to judge accurately.
Swords - for beating into Plowshares, right?
haha!
Absolutely. It is just something pondered over happy hour drinks. Unherd had a great interview with John Sumpton. As a historian, he notes that up until very recently in human history, the annihilation of the common folk was fair game in war. https://unherd.com/thepost/jonathan-sumption-war-lockdowns-and-lessons-from-the-past/
Brett Weinstein did a similar take as an evolutionary biologist with Oliver Niel. Humans are very triable as part of our evolution for survival. I now see how trade helps create peace because you need to trust someone outside your group.
Oh my, waves of tears reading this... thank you so much for this wonderful share xxx
Beautifully written. Very timely for me as I attended a workshop 2 days ago where the expectation was that all would wear masks. The vast majority did. Only a few of us just quietly didn't. There was no confrontation, & no one asked us why we weren't going along. I love how you lay out the different stages in how this progressed for the person who did not want to mask. Very helpful.
I agree. I love this post and how Raquel/Charles laid out the different stages she went through in her decision about how to respond. And I also love your own report of quiet noncompliance. Thank you for the inspiration—reading about other people like you quietly standing firm in their own truth is empowering to me.
Thank you so much for sharing this story. Masks have begun to appear again here in England and I have noticed profound feelings in myself in response to the sight of someone doing their shopping in a mask. I have been preparing myself for the kind of scenario Raquel experienced and telling myself that come what may and whatever I may have to give up I will not comply with any mask requirements. Raquel helps me prepare my responses if I need them - Thankyou Raquel. I am remembering my several Quaker friends who were on opposite sides of the mask issue and how even in the environment of Quaker tolerance one group sat outside the meeting house in the garden while a masked and socially distanced meeting happened inside and there was one friend who just stayed away. In Raquel's dance class there was a big change in the former maskers. I wonder how that came about. I also wonder how the group would have felt if some were masked and some not? It is hard to imagine a feeling of cohesion then - more of an uncomfortable truce perhaps. I don't think masks in dance class or anywhere else is a trivial issue. Standing up or out for what I or you believe in peacefully and powerfully takes courage. Perhaps the "War on Covid" years have taught me and others a different kind of courage.
Hi Jill:
Are you talking about FMC ? That is the Quaker meeting I used to go to. I tried to speak in business meeting about how problematic masks are. I had to wear a mask to attend business meeting at all and I had to try to understand people who are speaking with a mask on. I have said in Quaker business meeting that I think masking children is child abuse. After business meeting where I spoke about how problematic masks are, no one came to speak to me and only one person tried to email me. I am now one of the people that just doesn't go to meeting. Our meeting now has half the room sitting with masks on and the other half of the room without masks. The without masks group is not supposed to sit on the other side. I have such a visceral reaction to this whole scenario that I just can't stand to go at all. So I am searching for a new spiritual home. I find the wall of silence to be the worst kind of wall of all.
Hi Rachel, My Quaker friends and my sister attend meetings in West Sussex, England. Some were stalwart rebels throughout lockdowns etc and others conformed to every edict strictly and more. I observed from the sidelines and kept talking to all of them. I was somehow particularly saddened that Quaker communities were so divided and so unable to talk about this stuff. I was able to have some deep discussions with one friend who agreed to dialogue. It was very strange how we could find common ground on most issues but on the Covid stuff it was as if we were talking different languages in spite of our best efforts. I agree with you that walls of silence are very hard to understand or to live with. I am looking for a new political home since as Charles once said "I didn't leave the left, the left left me". It is hard to lose a community. We still have so much grief to process. Go well in your search for a new home.
Anon, Accept them as you would have them accept you.
Yes, and how would the class have responded three years ago.
I want to wholeheartedly agree with the sentiment of your piece, Charles, but encounter the following blocks: your previous essay was criticised for advocating suspension of the Palestinian government, but not the Israeli government. Whatever accusations of terror and madness one may rightly level at Hamas, one must also level at Netanyahu and his war party.
You omit this in your latest essay. You go on to suggest a peace process that takes the history of all peoples into account. The history of Jews in the land we call Israel begins in 1948. The history of the Palestinians goes back much further. We have a displaced and traumatised people (the Jews) still trying to build their house, at massive and growing expense to themselves and others, "justified" by the Bible, the Jewish Holocaust, dehumanisation of the Palestinians and now the Hamas attack.
You mean well, but I am concerned that you shy away from admitting the criminal basis on which the state of Israel stands (and I believe will fall) save for comments dragged out of you by critics.
This is the exceptionalism world opinion is swinging against. When we have the Israeli ambassador telling us “there is no humanitarian crisis.” When we have a church sheltering terrified civilians shelled. When we have a hospital shelled, followed by the claim it was a Hamas rocket, backed by fabricated evidence. When we have 75 years of Israeli oppression and apartheid. When we have a million children in a concentration camp shelled...
You know all this but it is important to say it, clearly and explicitly—not to dehumanise the Israelis (they're doing a great job of that themselves)—but to address the imbalance in the way the mess is talked about. It gives world “leaders” license to perpetuate that imbalance viz. “Israel has a right to defend itself.”
A call to history to be respected must lead by example, lest the usual apply: history is written by the victors. That is the doctrine Jewish supremacists adhere to. That is the doctrine Islamic supremacists adhere to. Their call divides God and is therefore godless.
If humanitarianism is to be our god—and this is the large part of your essay I agree with—we must look unflinchingly and clinically at the facts.
Supremacist doctrine hammered into Israelis and the Jewish diaspora holds that the God of the Old Testament granted Jews the promised land. Hence the settlers uttering madness like, “I was here 2000 years ago.” Hence the ongoing ethnic cleansing and seizing of land.
A humanitarian stance cannot seek, deliberately or tacitly, to equate the tens of thousands of Palestinians killed to the thousands of Israelis killed. That would admit the non-humanitarian idea that an Israeli life is worth more than a Palestinian one.
A call to history must take in the Jewish Holocaust, which the Palestinians had nothing to do with, and the Nakba, which Jews had everything to do with. It must take in 75 years of oppression. It must take in the asymmetrical fatalities and military power, and the endless machinations of the pro Israel lobby to disguise this asymmetry and paint Israel as the victim.
World opinion—by that I mean the perception of the tragedy by the man and woman on the street, Banksy, Liverpool Football Club, Pink Floyd, the tendency of humans to support the underdog—is rapidly swinging from unequivocal support of Israel to disgust at the actions of a rogue state.
Jews who choose to live in Israel risk siding with a doctrine the licenses God's People to oppress and deceive. They must, as many are doing, stare the gift horse of that doctrine in the mouth.
Purveyors of peace must address the imbalance of that doctrine, especially when it is adopted, for entirely cynical reasons, by world powers. If we explicitly or tacitly argue for symmetry, we diminish Palestinian suffering, and leave our argument open to accusations of bias, exceptionalism and racism. Perhaps worst of all for thought leaders, such an argument lags behind world opinion.
Once again: a million children in a concentration camp. Bombed. Hospital patients. Bombed. People sheltering in a church. Bombed. The numbers. The air strikes. The incursions. The wall.
Let's acknowledge it. Let's say it. Then our arguments can have humanitarian weight. Many are calling it—Noam Chomsky, Naomi Klein, Ilan Pappe, Jeremy Corbyn. I'm not asking for a pile-on. This is not a call for mob mentality. It is a call to acknowledge what the State of Israel is founded on. Things tend to continue as they began.
We could say: all states are founded on awfulness. Take the UK. Take the US. Nations have karma. Israel's karmic equations are especially tight because the land it occupies is holy. We are witnessing the holiness of that land. Visiting mass violence on it has the power to collapse the world. Maybe that is what has to happen. Maybe we can pull out of the nosedive and admit the asymmetry loudly and clearly. Then we can look at equanimity.
Wishing you strength, clarity and good spirits in your great work.
Brilliant, I so agree!
Beautiful and to the point. Love the phases breakdown... Thank you for sharing this!
Wow. What an example. I too have found it hard to write about anything but what is happening in Gaza at the moment. To do so feels like turning away from it, and I can't bring myself to do that. You've shown how our personal lives and this larger tragedy interweave. Thank you. But should we really call it the Holy Land? Isn't all land Holy?
I love Raquel's story, Charles. Thank you for sharing with us.
Love is a revolution.
Yes, and if and only if the love accepts qualititave judgements that grow the love with more acceptance of varieties of religious experiments as well as varieties of democractic judgement-settling. I.e. can we love SCOTUS for extending, even if only temporarily, the administrations blatant domestic and international violations of our own First Amendment? Do we want to include loving a convoluted version of 'democracy' that wages forever wars around the globe while financing it wherever else it wants to create headaches for others?
To love doesn't mean to agree with. It means to want the highest for them. To love a child may include discipline, or saying no. Never "anything goes."
YES
"A cease-fire, humanitarian relief, and thousands upon thousands of peace witnesses flooding the Holy Land. Then a political process that recognizes the full history of all the people in the region, that incorporates their stories and makes room for all of them in a peaceful homeland."
And then---to continue with this wonderous dream-- we pile the evil books that teach hatred in the name of the God of Abraham (in his various guises) in the middle of a square in Jerusalem and burn them. And then we dance around that Holy Fire. And weep . . .
Indeed, a wonderful story. But is it really applicable to the situation in the 'holy land'? Not so sure. I think it is way too late; the state of Israel has murdered and displaced too many people. There had been a moment, at the very beginning, when the newcomers could have chosen to share the land granted to them, not by God but by the British Empire. But their souls were scorched by the poisons of the gas chambers. They were driven to recreate their ghettos and concertation camps, to project their historical misery onto the other, onto the people who looked so much like them.
Israelis are murdering children en mass to stay 'safe.' Right now!
God maybe dead, but we live in a moral universe. Teens who raved in the desert, enjoyed their music and each other right next door to the place of immense misery, made their moral choice. Some moral choices are quite deadly.
It is fucking terrifying to be a Jewess.
Go fuck yourself you idiot Christian racist. Church invented devil. "Talmud-centric?" Do you even know what you are talking about, you brainwashed anti-Semitic American ignoramus?
Thank you Charles and thank you Raquel too. This piece is very moving for me - I think I am in the grief stage of the process , deep sadness and a feeling of uselessness. But I think trying to reframe my thoughts and feelings towards the protagonists in a different way from ‘hero’ or ‘villain’ feels like good work for my heart. And gives me some small hope in the sadness.
Wonderful