A Deconstruction Of The Death Of Christ: It’s Not What You Think


–=–

“But the natural (idiot/foolish) man receiveth not
the things of the Spirit of God: for they are foolishness unto him:
neither can he know [them], because they are spiritually discerned.”

–1 Corinthians 2:14

–=–

 

As a consummate Bible researcher nowadays, I am always looking for spiritual, reasonable explanations for the most unreasonable, ridiculous sounding of stories. There is, of course, a fine line between deciphering the absurd to find spiritual instruction and playing the fool. The king’s scribes were quite clever in their transliterations, leaving traps and pitfalls throughout the Crown’s copyrighted, English (dog-Latin) version. Some may take offense at the idea that I am calling the story of Christ’s death and resurrection as a somewhat ridiculous story, and to you otherwise reasonable people, I will simply offer to tell you why I say this over a glass of blood-turned wine along with Jonah inside the “whale’s” (translation sea monster’s) mouth aside a nice burning bush.

The ancient, well known, often utilized, and certainly well established Truth is that the more ridiculous an allegory or other moral story is portrayed, the more easily it is remembered. If you’ve ever bought one of those memory courses from a television infomercial as I did when I was a very young lad, you’ll find the same exact lesson on how ridiculousness supercharges the memory, complete with instructions on how to imagine the utmost ridiculous connections to different images in your head in order to remember a list of 100, or even 1,000 words. The stranger the image or description and correlation of those words in order, the more memorable that list becomes. Indeed, in trying to memorize cold a list of irrelevant words, I could not, my mind able to recite merely a few, out of order, and without coherent purpose. But when I applied the rules of ridiculousness, that is, when I followed the instructions and correlated the words as a continuous, absolutely absurd set of details in a story of my own imagination,  I was amazingly able to remember lists of 100 or more words, in order, by simply connecting each word as instructed. For example, if the first word is elephant and the second word is umbrella, I was instructed to imagine the most silly looking of elephants, complete with concerned expression and a polka-dotted leotard, that is holding an umbrella. And if the third word was then turtle, then I would imagine the elephant in the ridiculous leotard holding the umbrella up against falling turtles, themselves having something odd about them. If the forth word was water, then I would imagine the turtles doing an awesome 360 flip and while diving into the ocean, or if it were sunglasses, then of course the turtles would be sporting some shades. And so it went, word after totally unrelated word, placed by my mind into the most ridiculous of loosely linked, situational absurdities. And sure enough, as I pictured these things in my mind, I was able to spout off that list of words with hardly any effort at all, because who could resist that silly elephant holding an umbrella so as not to get hit by the falling turtles that were diving into the ocean with sunglasses, etc. etc.

When I consider all the True life stories I’ve heard over the years, as I am sure the reader would agree, again I find that I remember the most outlandish, ridiculous, or even most violent ones most often. I find myself telling stories about these events, and usually I do so because of their ridiculousness, their humor, or their horror. Comedians make whole stand-up routines based on such ridiculous stories, turning them into jokes that may or may not be true… but they sure are memorable. And of course we remember certain jokes because they are funny, and they are funny because they are absurd or even impossible in Nature. Perhaps they are embarrassing, or they remind us of something close to home or a personal experience. Whatever the case, we are wired to remember the most bizarre shit. We remember the harshness of violence, experiencing post traumatic stress, as another example. If I were to ask anyone where they were on 9/11/2001, they could probably tell me in detail, simply because what they really remember is a link between the out-of-place absurdity of watching the World Trade Centers burning and falling on television, because such an absurdity was in the background on every television screen, everywhere, making whatever one was doing that day stand out. In fact, when prompted to speak about that horrific event, many of us specifically reference whatever mundane task we were preforming and whatever usual place we were lingering. But if I were to ask anyone where they were three days before their 27th birthday, they most likely would have no clue. Why? No association. No correlation. No event to remember. No story to tell. Whatever stands out about the event, the story, the happenstance, and specifically the ridiculousness of the situation, the more memorable it is. It’s like a filter in the mind, where the details of what is considered as normal or routine are lost in the shuffle, but where learnable or unique moments shine through, teaching and preparing us for the future. After all, there’s a psychological reason why shock-jocks are so unwittingly popular and why news outlets have “breaking news” and cover certain stories for weeks at a time, 24 hours a day.

Entertainments are the same way. The more scary, the more ridiculous, the more fantastical, the more memorable they are. For how can one explain what does not exist, say in science fiction or fantasy, without a deep impression of that non-existent thing to the point of being able to picture it in ones mind? Yet most of us (I hope) can still distinguish between reality and fantasy. In other words, after seeing a fictional movie, we do not believe in those false, computer-enhanced images as what is actually real or as history. That would be Idolatry. And, I’m sorry and happy to say, religions are no exception to this rule.

Why are all the stories of the gods of all the cultures so ridiculous? Why are the gods tyrannical, manipulative monsters with multiple heads or some other superpower or supernatural attribute? From Zeus to the Babylonian creation story, these tales are physically, scientifically, and logically impossible to believe. Yet we remember them, don’t we? Many insist they are to be taken as literally True, as the Word of God, ironically and in idolatry assigning supernatural qualities to the God of Nature, while completely loosing the moral teaching intended through that ridiculousness. And I agree, they are the Word of God (Truth)… but only if you are taking them as the metaphor and moral story they are meant to be understood as. They are mythical because myth is memorable. All civilizations, all countries and nations, all religions, are built upon their own ridiculous myths about those that founded or formed them. Without the mythology of the founding fathers, there would be no purpose behind the United States, and certainly no reason to support what it has morphed into in modern times — a simulacra (a copy having nothing to do with its original) desperately promoting that patriot mythology as its reason for its post-modern existence. If Zeus was a librarian that had no authority, that shuffled books around all day without any other adventure or purpose, what could we possibly learn as his moral story? What would be memorable about his godliness?

The problem is that, while we remember the story, we often don’t remember or were never taught the point behind the ridiculous, impossible-to-be-True story. We are never told the moral lesson of the allegory. And so we take it literally, which in our minds causes the story to become historical “fact” instead of learning from the story (pretended history). We mistake facts with Truths. For instance, it is a fact that Han Solo and Chewbacca are ship-mates. But did you know it’s a fact that they are also lifelong friends? These are facts, in fiction. But they are not Truths. They are not the Word of God. There are many facts used to tell the story of the Law, that is, of the Word of God. Yet the Word (moral Law) is often lost behind belief in the facts, which aren’t Truths, only tools to cause Truth to shine. And often those facts are ridiculous, causing memory association. But as the Bible quote above suggests, the fool may not discern spiritual Truths because the fool is too busy trying to prove or disprove the facts, trying to prove the history instead of learning from it. It is foolish to believe that the purpose of the stories (mythos) of any history is to establish fact. Only the elite do this, and only to prove their power positions over the common people. These historical facts are institutional lies that justify completely unjustifiable rulers, which would have no purpose or reason behind their otherwise totally illegitimate rule if it weren’t for the established, embellished, generally bullshit historical fact they force us to learn in their public schools and institutions. And the only reason we fall for these so-called histories is because we forget their purpose their reason, their intention. We take them as literal instead of make-believe. We allow the most ridiculous events, like 9-11, to be used as historical facts in their justification for completely immoral, illegitimate, tyrannical laws to be passed against us. And we consider those laws somehow as truths instead of the prima facie (on their face) facts they actually are. We consider what is totally avoidable as that which is unavoidable, simply because we are tricked by their supposed factual history of inventions instead of learning from them. We don’t emulate the founding fathers in their dissent from the king, we treat them as gods, as the reason why their great grandchildren continue to rule the illegitimate United States corporation, which didn’t even exist until after those founding fathers (gods) were dead. In other words, prima facie means that these legal terms and laws are all facts as long as nobody questions their legitimacy, which is the description of every government. Corrupt men that seek power all have this trait in common — they turn the moral lessons meant to be learned by the retelling of history into the evidence of why they should be rulers. They turn myth into fact, and force it to be labeled and considered by fools as Truth.

Judging by the amount of narcissism taking place nowadays, I’d say the point of the story of Narcissus has been lost, for example. Perhaps they’ll name a cell phone camera model or selfie app after that unfortunate character of mythology? Or perhaps the story of the modern Narcissist must be rewritten to reflect the idiotic “accidents” taking place so often, as people walk off of cliffs while filming themselves doing so, even as they fall to their death on the craggy rocks below. Perhaps the myth of the Lemmings may need to be rewritten for these post-modern times, where those cute, cuddly creatures walk off the cliff with cell phones in their paws?

We may watch and enjoy movies like Clash of the Titans or Lord of the Rings without coming away from the story with its actual purpose for being told — the moral lesson. Unfortunately, the story of Jesus Christ and his death and resurrection are no different. When taken literally, as a purely historical event, the point of christ’s death is completely lost. It serves no purpose. It becomes an excuse instead of a cause. The moral takeaway and lesson of the life and death of Christ today for most “Christians” is just about as dead as that of the Greek gods.

In this study, I’d like to show you the exact place in the Bible where the spiritual, moral reason behind this story of Christ is explained. But first we have to understand what was the Babylonian, Mosaic tradition of animal and human sacrifice before the Christ (New Law) became the metaphoric, spiritual replacement for the literal sacrificial lamb.

PASCHAL – adjective – [Latin pascha.] Pertaining to the passover, or to Easter. (–Webster’s Dictionary of the English language, 1828)

PASSOVER – noun – [pass and over.] A feast of the Jews, instituted to commemorate the providential escape of the Hebrews, in Egypt, when God smiting the first-born of the Egyptians, passed over the houses of the Israelites, which were marked with the blood of the paschal lamb. 1. The sacrifice offered at the feast of the passover. (–Webster’s Dictionary of the English language, 1828)

EASTER – noun – A festival of the christian church observed in commemoration of our Savior’s resurrection. It answers to the pascha or passover of the Hebrews, and most nations still give it this name, pascha, pask, paque. (–Webster’s Dictionary of the English language, 1828)

–=–

Think these are the same holidays? Have you been told that Easter and Passover are similar in their celebrative purpose? It’s a lie. Don’t believe it. The story of Easter is designed to replace the Babylonian (i.e. Jewish) story of Passover just as the New Testament is meant to replace the Old. In other words, the sacrifice of the “Son of God” is designed to replace the sacrifice of animals to the Babylonian gods. The New Testament is designed not to eliminate but to fulfill the Old.

–=–

“Ever since the New Testament, the paschal lamb has been interpreted as prefiguring Jesus. In subsequent centuries, Church Fathers and later clergy taught that Jesus was the lamb of God, the new Passover sacrificeThe Christian who is quoted or paraphrased in Sefer Nitztzahon Yashan makes the curious argument: the difficulty of offering any rational reason for the details of the paschal sacrifice in Exodus 12 provesthat the text requires an allegorical explanation, and it must be an allegory about Jesus. This seems to have led Jews to work harder to prove that, on the literal level, the rules were meaningful, not arbitrary… Modern biblical scholars also struggle with the meaning of the ritual and the significance of these details, typically using anthropological tools to understand it, and suggesting that most of these rituals did not originate with a historical first Passover… Such is the nature of allegorical explanations. Christians claimed that the allegory was about Jesus, but there was nothing to stop another allegorist from giving a totally different explanation, in this case, that it was about the Jewish people as a whole.”

–Prof. Rabbi Martin Lockshin, excerpted from ‘Searching for the Meaning of the Passover Sacrifice, The need for medieval exegetes to suggest a plausible alternative to the Christian exegesis of this ritual’

–=–

The problem? Here we have an allegory trying desperately to be proven as a history. Happens all the time. Again, the fool completely misses the spiritual lesson, because to the fool, the spiritual lesson is foolishness, and the spiritual coldness and irrelevance of history and scientific proofs are paramount.

Now, before you get all bent out of shape because of some pseudo-religious belief that the modern conceptualization of “science” as the new, replacement-for-Christ savior of men is the holy grail of the atheist (fool) and the logician, hold your horses just a moment and think about what I’m saying here. Because this question is a very reasonable one that can easily and even scientifically be answered: can science be applied to the Bible? In other words, can science discern the moral value and intent from an allegorical story or mythological history? Can science be used to prove or disprove an allegory, a metaphor, an aphorism, a moral equivalent, or a mythology? Of course it can’t. What a fool one must be to attempt to apply science to a book of moral stories and inherent Laws intended as that which is not even in the realm of scientific observation! Shall we use science to examine whether or not Little Miss Muffet truly sat on a Tuffet, searching desperately through historical ruins to prove said tuffet and the girl that sat on it actually existed? Shall we merely take at its word the story of Mary and her supposedly little lamb and that its fleece was apparently white as snow? Was Wilber really “Some Pig” as Charlotte the Black Widow claims him to be, or was he just another side of bacon waiting to happen? You must understand that this is not a pro- or anti- science argument, but rather just a case where science isn’t even part of the topic. It simply isn’t necessary or relevant to the purpose and intent of the Bible as a moral teaching tool to invoke scientific methods. Spirituality and moral behavior is not a scientific subject. And it’s utterly ridiculous to attempt to try and prove or disprove the Bible’s allegorical, metaphorical nature with the tools of science. Perhaps the fact that this idea is so ridiculous is why it has caught on with such fervor among non-thinking fools. Yet one must ask such a purveyor of scientific proofs for allegorical stories this question: which is more ridiculous and unscientific, the Bible stories themselves, or trying to prove or disprove those moral stories with science? LOL! Why would anyone attempt to bring science into a moral discussion? Unless, perhaps, one wishes to purposefully confuse the very intent and purpose of the Bible’s allegorical mythos and moral lessons with some “factual” or “scientifically provable” history (an oxymoron) that never actually happened so as to justify whatever it is they call themselves… kings, priests, popes, magistrates, judges, jews, Christians, or just good old false gods?

The moral of this story is that morals cannot be proven by science. They are not of the same realm. That is to say that spiritual thought and action are not and cannot be scientifically justified. Inversely, there is no spirituality in science, for True science seeks only to understand Nature Itself, not decipher its spiritual meaning. Attempting to apply science to the Bible is like applying spiritual morals to a spiritless machine. It just doesn’t work. Yet, it certainly works to confuse and confound most people from understanding the Bible. In that way, science may very well, in the end, triumph over the minds of men and destroy our collective spirit.

You see, If the bible can be made into an artificially “factual” history (fact) instead of an allegory (moral Truth) in the minds of Christians… oh, wait, that’s already happened. That’s the purpose of legal corporations that in their corporate charters call themselves by differing, anti-Biblical, empty, denominational religious names. And each one has a history of its own. The Methodists have their founding father, John Wesley. The Catholics have their replacement (anti) God and vicar of christ, the Pope. The 7th Day Adventists have their very recent history of Ellen White and John Nevins Andrews, their own founding fathers. The Baptists founding father in Amsterdam was John Smyth, with John Clark or Roger Williams in America. Mormons have their bizarre history and replacement Christ in Joseph Smith, while scientology was apparently invented by L. Ron Hubbard, a science fiction author, after he made a bet between fellow high profile sci-fi writers over a poker game that Hubbard could not start a new, successful religion of his own. All religions have their histories, that is, their “facts” that are used to justify their own false, corporate doctrines. Nevermind the repeated warnings of the Bible that we should call no man as “father” nor take any other doctrine (law) but that of the Bible.

And that brings us back to the allegory of the passover…

Let us be clear that this so-called Jewish holiday, that of the celebration of the “pass-over” or paschal (lamb) sacrifice, was not the physical, literal killing or slaughtering of all the first born human sons and animals. That’s too ridiculous even for the Bible. But the consideration of it, that of the killing of children, was a powerful metaphorical conception that certainly did represent the taking away of the right of what is called primogeniture. This concept of law is not a physical attribute but a status, otherwise known in law as being the firstborn. And so we can quite fully understand the purpose of this allegory of the passover by simply understanding manmade law of the time, and therefore the purpose of putting to metaphoric death that spiritual status, that is, a right of succession.

PRIMOGENETUREnoun – 1. The state of being the firstborn child‘Maui and Tahaki are famous mythological heroes in Polynesia and they have more powerful manas than their elder brothers, though they are not the primogenitures.’ After the sin the primogenitures lost their privilege of serving in the Holy Temple and it was given to the Levites, who had abstained from the sin.’ 1.1 The right of succession belonging to the firstborn child, especially the feudal rule by which the whole real estate of an intestate passed to the eldest son(–Oxford Lexico.com Dictionary online)

PRIMOGENETURE – A historical term that refers to the rights and responsibilities of the first-born child among siblings in a family. When used in the legal sense, the term is used to discuss the right of the eldest son in the family to inherit his parents’ estate upon their death. The initial purpose of determining primogeniture was to keep an estate from being divided among siblings. When this was done, a parcel of land would continue to get smaller and smaller, which reduced the value of the overall property. To explore this concept, consider the following primogeniture definition.”

PRIMOGENETURE – (noun) – The state of being the firstborn child in the family. The system of inheritance or succession of the firstborn child, especially the eldest son

PRIMOGENETURE LAW – Primogeniture law historically determined that the first-born son among all of a couple’s children would inherit his parents’ entire estate upon their deaths. The purpose of this was so that the parcel of land would not end up being so subdivided that the value of each individual parcel would plummet. The term “primogeniture” was implied to refer to male children. If there were no male heirs, then primogeniture law determined that the property would be divided up among the daughters in equal shares. Primogeniture law actually hails from feudal England, and does not exist in the United States. (–Legal dictionary online, at https://legaldictionary.net)

–=–

Perhaps it slipped your mind that there happened to be no female children smitten by God (Jehovah) on that day of passover? Now, allegorically and legally, you know why. They simply were not male, and so not considered by law as “firstborn” and therefore had no right of primogeniture to put to figurative death. Disclaimer: No female children were harmed during the making of this allegory. This is what you might call as a big tell…

–=–

“And it came to pass, that at midnight the LORD (Jehovah) smote all the firstborn in the land of Egypt, from the firstborn of Pharaoh that sat on his throne unto the firstborn of the captive that was in the dungeon; and all the firstborn of cattle.” (–Exodus 12:29, KJB).
–=–

Only the “firstborn” (primogeniture) were “smote” by Jehovah. In other words, the right of succession to God’s Kingdom was allegorically usurped. This, by law and custom, and therefore by default, necessarily did not include any female children, which were never considered as firstborn. Again, it was the status of inheritable blood that was made figuratively dead, not the actual life of the child. Yet the blood-right remained (was saved) with the children of the Israelites, who escaped the “destroyer” of the “firstborn,” this word destroyer being a translation of the word shachath, which specifically means “moral corruption, rot, ruin, spoliation, perversion, or to be marred or marked (by evil/immorality).”” Yes, the destroyer (of spirituality and Truth) put to death all the “firstborn” male children (heirs), but this was a figurative, spiritual death, not a literal, physical one.

It is also very important not to confuse the “Jews” with the Israelites. These terms are not the same. The Israelites were men that followed the Law of God, that is, the Christ (Logos) as Law. The Jews (יְהוּדִי – Yĕhuwdiy; or Ἰουδαῖος, Ioudaios), were specifically defined as:

“The apostle John, inasmuch as agreeably to the state of things in his day he looked upon the Jews as a body of men hostile to Christianity, with whom he had come to see that both he and all true Christians had nothing in common as respects religious matters, even in his record of the life of Jesus not only himself makes a distinction between the Jews and Jesus, but ascribes to Jesus and his apostles language in which they distinguish themselves from the Jews, as though the latter sprang from an alien race: John 11:8; John 13:33. And those who (not only at Jerusalem, but also in Galilee, cf. John 6:41, 52) opposed his divine Master and his Master’s causeespecially the rulers, priests, members of the Sanhedrin, Pharisees — he does not hesitate to style οἱ Ἰουδαῖοι, since the hatred of these leaders exhibits the hatred of the whole nation toward Jesus: John 1:19; John 2:18, 20; John 5:10, 15ff,John 5:18; John 6:41,52; 7:1,11,13; 9:18,22; 10:24,31,33; 18:14.” (–Strong’s Concordance #G2453 entry, quoting THAYER’S GREEK LEXICON)

–=–

Hmm… sounds a lot like secular Israel and the worldwide, mostly atheistic jews (Ἰουδαῖοιof today, despite their masterful infiltration and blinding of Christian churches throughout the world.

Oh, but surely Christians and Jews can live together in harmony under the same Law, right? A Christian-Jewish Alliance? Forget the Bible, you’re racist if you don’t think so. That’s scientifically proven by the propaganda arm of the ADL!

As the Exodus story explains, it was the status of being firstborn (primogeniture), a legally recognized and spiritually induced (blood-right) status, that was in title only taken away from the Egyptians, including even Pharaoh’s own firstborn son (heir), whereas the firstborn of the Israelites (not jews) had their God-given rights preserved. God (Jehovah) figuratively passed over them in his taking away of the right of inheritance to God’s Kingdom, for they were not followers of the Law of Nature (God), that is, they did not respect the metaphoric lamb of God (Jesus Christ/Logos). But to understand this story the metaphor must be applied. Remember, this is not Clint’s opinion, this is defined straight out of the concordances and lexicons for the Bible. And this is just one of many hundreds of examples of the term death being used figuratively, meaning spiritual death, and signifying a loss of inheritance and access to God’s Law to defeat man’s.

All in all, the event is not even a religious one. In other words, it has nothing to do with religion, but is strictly an allegorical understanding of the law of inheritance and status as it applies to the Law of Nature (Christ).

The Egyptians and the Jews were, of course, idolators. They worshiped the false (untrue, unnatural), Babylonian gods. In other words, they did not worship and obey Truth (Nature) and Its Law. And so their horrific sacrifices were also made to idols (false gods).

Idol – Strong’s #G1497 – eidōlon

εἴδωλον, εἰδώλου, τό (εἶδος (cf. Winers Grammar, 96 (91); Etym. Magn. 296, 9)), in Greek writings from Homer down, an image, likeness, i. e. whatever represents the form of an object, either real or imaginary; used of the shades of the departed (in Homer), of apparitions, spectres, phantoms of the mind, etc.; in Biblical writings (an idol, i. e.):

1. the image of a heathen god: Acts 7:41; 1 Corinthians 12:2; Revelation 9:20 (Isaiah 30:22; 2 Chronicles 23:17, etc.; θεῶν ἤ δαιμον´ων εἴδωλα, Polybius 31, 3, 13);

2. a false god: Acts 15:20 (on which see ἀλίσγημα); Romans 2:22; 1 Corinthians 8:4, 7; 1 Corinthians 10:19; 2 Corinthians 6:16; 1 Thessalonians 1:9 (often in the Sept.); φυλάσσειν ἑαυτόν ἀπό τῶν εἰδώλων, to guard oneself from all manner of fellowship with heathen worship, (1 John 5:21).

–=–

Take the partaking (artificial sacrifice) of those little, corporately mass-produced, shitty-tasting little wafers and processed (unnatural), corporately manufactured grape (artificial) juice in church as a pretended “flesh” eating and “blood” drinking. What ever might the Bible say about that?

–=–

As concerning therefore the eating of those things that are offered in sacrifice unto idols, we know that an idol (G1497is nothing in the world, and that there is none other God but one… Howbeit there is not in every man that knowledge: for some with conscience of the idol (G1497) unto this hour eat it as a thing offered unto an idol; and their conscience being weak is defiled.”

—1 Corinthians 8: 4,7, KJB

–=–

“And were all baptized unto Moses in the cloud and in the sea; And did all eat the same spiritual meat; And did all drink the same spiritual drink: for they drank of that spiritual Rock that followed them: and that Rock was Christ.

—1 Corinthians 10: 2-4

–=–

Be not carried about with divers and strange doctrines. For it is a good thing that the heart be established with grace; not with meats, which have not profited them that have been occupied therein.”

—Hebrews 13: 9, KJB

–=–

Not only does the New Law of God (Christ) state not to worship or sacrifice idols, it also tells you that your meats should be spiritual, not worldly. And, of course, we find here one of many warnings not to follow strange doctrines, which basically is a reference to all modern, so-called “Christian” religions (worldly, secular corporations) and their useless, worldly ceremonies and rituals. The Bible is clear never to worship God in any of man’s false traditions, or in other words, never worship or pray to God through any artificial (manmade) invention.

Astoundingly, due to the stark ignorance of today’s populations in all nations, the planned reinvention and construction of the idol of the “Third Temple” reinvoking the Old, Babylonian law is under way. Here we find again blatant, and in my opinion purposeful, willful ignorance of the metaphoric, allegoric nature of the Biblical stories of the first two temples therein. This third temple can, according to the Bible, only stand and represent idolatry at its worst. Over and over we read that God’s Kingdom is not found in anything built by the hands of men. God’s Realm is Creation, not the resourced recreation of men. Therefore, any temple or other corporate church building is an idol, and every religion is necessarily a false, reinvented doctrine designed and incorporated (made legal under man’s false law) to misalign and replace God’s Law (doctrine) as told in Biblical allegory. The True Christian has no religion but that of unwaveringly following the example of Jesus Christ without artifice, s the personification of Logos (the Law of the Universe). And that just doesn’t include anything built by the hands (or minds) of men. For the Law of Nature, the Law of God, is self-Evident, self-Existent, as all of Nature and the Universe is, not an invention of man.

But in modern, Zionist-Jewish thought, from one Rabbi HaRav Avraham Yitzchak HaCohen Kook, the First Ashkenazi Chief Rabbi of Israel, revered and famed Torah sage, philosopher, writer, poet, iconic and beloved leader of religious Zionism and the return to Zion (1865-1935), is as expected completely foreign and opposed to Christ (God’s Law of Nature), using logical fallacy to promote pointless animal slaughter as idol sacrifice:

Will There be Sacrifices in the Third Temple?

Rav Kook’s views on the Temple service are sometimes misconstrued. A superficial reading of a passage in Olat Re’iyah (vol. I, p. 292) indicates that only grain offerings will be offered in the reinstated Temple service. To properly understand Rav Kook’s approach, it is necessary to read a related essay from Otzarot HaRe’iyah.]

What will the rebuilt Temple be like? Will we really offer animal sacrifices once again?

Protecting Animals

Some people object to the idea of sacrifices out of concern for the welfare of animals. However, this objection contains a measure of hypocrisy. Why should compassion for animals only be expressed with regard to humanity’s spiritual needs? If our opposition to animal slaughter is based not on weakness of character, but on recognition of the issue’s fundamental morality, then our first step should be to outlaw the killing of animals for food, clothing, and other material benefits.

In the world’s present state, the human race is weak, both physically and morally. The hour to protect animal life has not yet arrived. We still need to slaughter animals for our physical needs, and human morality requires that we maintain clear boundaries to distinguish between the relative value of human and animal life.

At this point in time, to advocate the protection of animals in our service of God is disingenuous. Is it moral to permit cruelty towards animals for our physical needs, yet forbid their use for our spiritual service, in sincere recognition and gratitude for God’s kindness? If our dedication and love for God can be expressed – at its highest level – with our willingness to surrender our own lives and die al kiddush Hashem, sanctifying God’s name, then certainly we should be willing to forgo the life of animals for this sublime goal…

Hints to the Future

Even in the current reality, we may feel uncomfortable about killing animals. This does not mean that the time for full animal rights has already arrived. Rather, these feelings come from a hidden anticipation of the future that is already ingrained in our souls, like many other spiritual aspirations.

Hints of these future changes may be found in the text of the Torah itself. Thus, it says that offerings are slaughtered on the northern side of the altar. Why this side? The north traditionally represents that which is incomplete and lacking, as it is written, “Out of the north, the evil shall break forth” (Jeremiah 1:14). In other words, the need to slaughter animals is a temporary concession to life in an incomplete world.

Furthermore, the Torah stipulates that sacrifices must be slaughtered “lirtzonchem” – “willingly”(Lev. 19:5). The Temple service must correspond to our needs and wants. As the Talmud in Erchin21a explains, one must be able to say, “I want to bring this offering.” When the slaughter of animals is no longer generally acceptable to society, this condition will not be fulfilled.

Finally, the Torah describes a person offering an animal sacrifice as “adam” (Lev. 1:2). This word indicates our current state of moral decline, a result of the unresolved sin of Adam, the first man. An individual offering a grain offering, on the other hand, is called “nefesh,” or “soul” (Lev. 2:1). The word nefesh implies a deeper, more essential level of humanity, independent of any temporary failings.

(Excerpt from: Arutz Sheva 7, IsraelNationalNews.com – quoting from Gold from the Land of Israel pp. 173-176. Adapted from Otzarot HaRe’iyah, vol. II, pp. 101-103; Olat Re’iyah vol. I, p. 292, sent to Arutz Sheva by Rabbi Chanan Morrison, RavKookTorah.org)

–=–

Read that again, would ya?

This blatant, temple-based return to the idolatry of the Babylonian, Mosaic Old Law should be a frightening nightmare to any moral man, yet we find the entirety of the so-called “Christian” religions brainwashed to be in praise and service to this Biblically defined, anti-Christ brood. This is the ultimate in antichrist rhetoric and action. This is literally the undoing of the allegory and purpose of the Christ story. This is the killing of Jesus Christ, in other words, the destruction of the New Testament Law (Law of Nature) and the reinstatement of the Old, secular Babylonian law. To be antichrist is to be against God’s Law, the New Testament, as exemplified by the allegory (example) of Christ. This is the very definition of the biblical word Jew, as we read above. It’s what all Christians should expect from Jews, again, as defined in the Bible. It’s their reason for existence, to defeat what they call openly as the false savior, Jesus Christ (New Law). This has nothing to do with race, or opinion, and everything to do with moral, spiritual consciousness toward Jehovah (Nature), that is, God’s Creation and Its Law.

And so we come, in the Bible, to where the reasoning behind this turning point from the law of men under Babylon and its false gods to the Law of Nature is explained, as the emergence of the New Law (Testament) based on the allegory of Jesus Christ. The purpose behind the Christ allegory, that is, the personification (story) of Jesus Christ as a man following the Law of Nature (Jehovah), was quite eloquently authored to replace the Babylonian hell of these idolators and their bloody, sacrificial rituals to false gods. This was made quite clear in the 9th chapter of Hebrews:

Heb 9:1 – Then verily the first covenant had also ordinances of divine service, and a worldly sanctuary.

Heb 9:2 – For there was a tabernacle made; the first, wherein was the candlestick, and the table, and the shewbread; which is called the sanctuary.

Heb 9:3 – And after the second veil, the tabernacle which is called the Holiest of all; (Author’s note: see here that a building made by the hands of men is called the Holiest of all instead of that which is God or a Creation of God’s Nature. In other words, these temples were sanctuaries against Jehovah/Nature, not in support of It.)

Heb 9:4 – Which had the golden censer, and the ark of the covenant overlaid round about with gold, wherein was the golden pot that had manna, and Aaron’s rod that budded, and the tables of the covenant;

Heb 9:5 – And over it the cherubims of glory shadowing the mercy seat; of which we cannot now speak particularly.

Heb 9:6 – Now when these things were thus ordained, the priests went always into the first tabernacle, accomplishing the service of God.

Heb 9:7 – But into the second went the high priest alone once every year, not without blood, which he offered for himself, and for the errors of the people:

Heb 9:8 – The Holy Ghost this signifying, that the way into the holiest of all was not yet made manifest, while as the first tabernacle was yet standing:

Heb 9:9 – Which was a figure (idol) for the time then present, in which were offered both gifts and sacrifices, that could not make him that did the service perfect, as pertaining to the conscience;

Heb 9:10 – Which stood only in meats and drinks, and divers washings, and carnal ordinances, imposed on them until the time of reformation.

Heb 9:11 – But Christ being come an high priest of good things to come, by a greater and more perfect tabernacle, not made with hands, that is to say, not of this building (idol);

Heb 9:12 – Neither by the blood of goats and calves, but by his own blood he entered in once into the holy place, having obtained eternal redemption for us.

Heb 9:13 – For if the blood of bulls and of goats, and the ashes of an heifer sprinkling the unclean, sanctifieth to the purifying of the flesh:

Heb 9:14 – How much more shall the blood of Christ, who through the eternal Spirit offered himself without spot to God, purge your conscience from dead works to serve the living God?

Heb 9:15 – And for this cause he is the mediator of the new testament, that by means of death, for the redemption of the transgressions that were under the first testament, they which are called might receive the promise of eternal inheritance.

Heb 9:16 – For where a testament is, there must also of necessity be the death of the testator.

Heb 9:17 – For a testament is of force after men are dead: otherwise it is of no strength at all while the testator liveth.

Heb 9:18 – Whereupon neither the first testament was dedicated without blood.

Heb 9:19 – For when Moses had spoken every precept to all the people according to the law, he took the blood of calves and of goats, with water, and scarlet wool, and hyssop, and sprinkled both the book, and all the people,

Heb 9:20 – Saying, This is the blood of the testament which God hath enjoined unto you.

Heb 9:21 – Moreover he sprinkled with blood both the tabernacle, and all the vessels of the ministry.

Heb 9:22 – And almost all things are by the law purged with blood; and without shedding of blood is no remission.

Heb 9:23 – It was therefore necessary that the patterns of things in the heavens should be purified with these; but the heavenly things themselves with better sacrifices than these.

Heb 9:24 – For Christ is not entered into the holy places made with hands, which are the figures (idols) of the true; but into heaven itself, now to appear in the presence of God for us:

Heb 9:25 – Nor yet that he should offer himself often, as the high priest entereth into the holy place every year with blood of others;

Heb 9:26 – For then must he often have suffered since the foundation of the world: but now once in the end of the world hath he appeared to put away sin by the sacrifice of himself.

Heb 9:27 – And as it is appointed unto men once to die, but after this the judgment:

Heb 9:28 – So Christ was once offered to bear the sins of many; and unto them that look for him shall he appear the second time without sin unto salvation.

–=–

The point? Worshiping God through idols was ceased, where Jesus Christ (personification and example of Logos) replaced those idols. We are called in the New Testament not to worship Jesus Christ as God or as an idol, but to become Christlike in our actions under Gods Law so as to worship Jehovah. Instead of sacrificing idols to God, we are to be the sacrifice ourselves, sacrificing (crucifying) all worldly things so as to live spiritually, in the Realm of God’s Nature and under Its Law. We are to become the sons of God by following the example. In this way, the sacrifice is Real, not made in idolatry, or in other words, we act on and under the Law of God (Nature) instead of just using idols as an excuse not to follow that Law. In essence, what this is saying is that a man cannot make his sins disappear in some mock, ceremonial atonement, by killing , mutilating, and bleeding dry some poor defenseless animal that is part of God’s Creation, for this pointless, purposeless murder of an innocent beast is certainly a sin in and of itself. It makes about as much sense as hunting elephants and giraffes for sport. You cannot cleanse your own blood of its sin by taking that of another, completely innocent beast. No, it is you that must stop acting like a beast, sacrificing from your spiritual Life that which is of the world of the flesh, the world of men (i.e. secularism, legalism). Instead of slaying innocent beasts as the Babylonian false gods demanded, man must follow the example of Christ (the Law of Nature personified) in order to rectify ones own sin — to be reborn from the realm of man’s law into the realm of God’s Law, in order to go back to Nature (God). In other words, this means that the legal person, the respect of fiction and the law that governs fiction, the lies, must die (metaphorically), so that the spiritual man may emerge without legal ties (false law) that prevent a man from acting under God’s Law. One cannot be saved from the trappings of false religion and worldly afflictions through useless killing in idolatry. It is our blood that must be spiritually purified. Thus, the Christ allegory is a guidepost allowing all men to return from the Babylonian woe, from Jewish (antichrist) influence, back to the very Nature we are born originally into. We that shed what the Bible refers to as sin can only do so by following the Law of Nature (Logos). For sin is just a general term meaning artifice, lies, fictions, idolatry, and self-deceit. SYN. That which is synthetic, not of Nature, not of God’s Realm or under Its’ Law.

So let’s put these pieces together here…

The Bible Law (i.e. common law of blood-right) says that in order for a testament to be valid, its testator (author) must be dead. No death, no inheritance. So one must ask oneself, how does an undying, “Living God” (Jehovah), defined as the entirety of Existence, the Universe and Nature Itself in Supreme Being (the verb Being, as Existence Itself), construct such a testament and still remain the eternal, never-ending, Living God? Here we may better understand the purpose behind the allegory of the Son (testator) of God, or He that was allegorically sent to die for our sins, in order that the New Testament (New Law of God) might be left to all men through death, a requirement of the law of the testator. This is figuratively the exact story played out in the maxims of law. In other words, this is an allegorical representation of what all men must suffer; namely, to be reborn from civil (legal) death in exchange for spiritual (True) Life under God, under the Law of Nature (Jehovah), personified in the story (allegory) of Christ. And yet it is so clearly written here that this True Life of substance without idolatry and empty sacrifice cannot be attained by merely participating in religious ceremonies and false sacrificial “communions” of eating meats (defined scripturally as any foodstuffs, literal or figurative) to false idols. This ceremonial custom of animal sacrifice, in fact, is surprisingly, completely against scripture, as we can read above. Just as you can’t squeeze blood from a turnip, as the saying goes, you certainly cannot squeeze the spiritual (figurative) blood of christ (atonement/forgiveness of sins) out of a communion wafer or other idol, and especially not from one of God’s own innocent Creatures. And no, grape juice is not a substitute for the works of, in, and under the blood of christ (Logos – God’s Law personified).

While the current false doctrines of corporate, religious gobbledygook and the ceremonial nonsense it promotes is enough to drive men away from such spiritually sound principles as the notion of the True meaning and intent behind the “blood of christ” and the reason for this story of the ultimate sacrifice by God — that a testament necessarily means the death of its testator — we may understand that the never-ending, never-changing God (Jehovah) cannot die lest we all figuratively die with It, waking up to our True, spiritual Nature. Therefore, the Son of God must be sacrificed, so that the Law (Will) of God may be testified and transferred to us. But in order to inherit this set of principles, we must become the sons of God ourselves. Jesus Christ is our example of how to do this, by following the Law of God. As Its sons, we become the spiritual, figurative primogeniture of God’s Kingdom (Nature). If you try and take this as literal, you will never understand It nor find yourself in It. You must reach deep down and find what is lost, that is, the ability to Love and cherish such moral stories and allegories for what they are intended to give you, learning from them as intended, and then acting accordingly. Poetry is, it turns out, for Real men. In other words, man may now Live Truly under this New Testament of Law, by the Will of Jehovah, by following in the sacrificial (metaphoric) blood of christ as a brotherhood of God’s sons. And what is so beautiful about this concept is that it literally requires nothing. No thing. No persons, places, or things (nouns/names). It is the negative Law, the Law of Truth, and Truth has no name (noun). It is the realm of God, of Nature, of that which is unblemished by the names and titles and defects and marks and fictional rights of man’s law and custom. He that is of God is the lesser part of God. Yet he who falls from such Grace is still of the Greater Good (God), the Higher Whole, but is tricked into allowing (consenting) that which is lesser in Law to overtake him. For the Greater always contains the lesser, just as the principal always contains the agent, the truster the trustee, the employer the employee, and so on. Hierarchically speaking, the power and Glory and Grace of that which is of Jehovah never loses its power or its Law, for the Law of Nature reigns supreme at all times, knowing that without it no Existence of any kind, Real or artificial, would Exist, as all self-Existence is literally Jehovah defined. All other forms of so-called “existence” are artificial, or that which is a re-creation of man. Thus, the foundational, scripture-based maxims of law spell out and follow exactly what one would expect.

But there is a problem. For the scriptures, after so much shared wisdom and warning with regards to the trickery of men and the simple instructions given from the perspective of being in Grace in recognizing everything that is false and of the father of lies (i.e. the re-creations of man influenced by devilish, adversarial intentions), also give us the free will to go against the Will of God, to break the Law and Covenant. The willing fool has no place in God’s Realm and has no access to God’s Law. He that should worship and express joy by the deceits and trickery of the lies of mans’ artifice, enjoining himself to that which is below him in persona (mask) and flattering title (idol), shall then be under the law of that which is lower than him, representing spiritual death, as the inability to govern ones own actions under God’s Law. So says the Bible — and thus the foundational maxims of law agree.

Many of the Highest maxims of law are simply constructs stripped from the Bible. This should be of no surprise when one understands that the Bible (as the unwritten, moral Law) is the foundation of the common law, and that, therefore, the unwritten was copied unto the written (Roman) law for the purposes of opposition. In other words, the unwritten, moral law must be recognized in order for the written, immoral law to have purpose, otherwise there is no reason for man’s law. Without recognition of Christ (God’s Law/Logos) there is no need or use for anything anti-christ. There is no left without right, no up without down, no light without darkness, no evil without good. To understand this, one must understand that God’s Law is neutral, whereas the Law of Rome is strict and sanctioned (punishable). By neutrality I mean that God’s Law is the Law of Nature, as is an inevitable Act of God, meaning the Act had nothing to do with man’s designs, inventions, or interference. It just Is. It Exists with or without man’s presence. A lightening strike causing a fire is an Act of God. It is a neutral event in Nature, and only a fool would believe it to be targeted at anything or sent for the purposes of some man’s judgement. What arrogance, conceit, and outright idiocy must it take for any man to believe that the power of the Universe (God) can or should be directed at any other man, or upon oneself. Yes, I will certainly concede that the idiot that ignorantly walks into a lightening storm without the fear of the Universe (God’s Nature and Law) increases his chances of being judged for his stupidity, if you will. But the purpose of that discharge of energy we call as lightening has for its purpose nothing to do with any man or any other object it connects with. If man didn’t exist, lightening would still strike wherever Nature’s Design warranted it. And so it is with the notion of God’s Judgment. When the Law of God, the Law of Nature, and the Laws of Nature are broken, then it is only reasonable to conclude that some consequence (judgement) will follow, rebalancing the metaphorical scales of Nature’s permanent Design. Poison the drinking well, and the user of that well will be judged (poisoned) for his own sin. Eat unnaturally according to FDA recommendations and be judged with obesity, diabetes, cancer, or other illness. This is a neutral, or rather a causality effect, not a religious one. We reap what we sow, and most of the time we deserve the fate we create for ourselves.

The deceits promulgated by the church and state are seemingly insurmountable at times, just as the perceived need of money, the root fo all evil, is certainly the great destroyer of our time. To be deceived is a choice, and the Bible allows all men to be deceived if they choose to be. Free will… And, of course, the legal law of men depends upon deceit. Without deceit, there would be no nations, no governments, and no false gods heading those governments. The maxims of man’s law repeatedly tell us that he who seeks to be deceived cannot then complain about being deceived when he acts voluntarily in that deceit. Deceit is made legal by governments of the legal (artificial) realm, by contract, and specifically by voluntary participation in that deceitful practice. Contracts are the strings that control the puppet, which is why the Bible forbids them. For a contract is always between legal persons and therefore under the law of fictional (legal) persons, not God’s Law. Ignorance of God’s Law is no more an excuse than ignorance of man’s legal law according to its maxims and to the Bible. The difference is plain though, for the Bible warns against such deceits and gives you the Law of God (the allegory of Christ personified) in order to escape them. Thus, God’s Word (Law) is said to be the Armor of God, or in other words, the Shield and Sword of Truth (God). The Truth (God) will set you free, but only if you follow the Law of God (Truth/Nature) exemplified by the allegory of Christ. The legal system wholly depends on self-deceit, on illusion, on trickery, on dissimulation, and on the fact that those that are deceived remain in such a state of decay.

Job 12:16  – With him is strength and wisdom: the deceived and the deceiver are his (the destroyers’).

2Ti 3:13 – But evil men and seducers shall wax worse and worse, deceiving, and being deceived.

Deu 11:16 – Take heed to yourselves, that your heart be not deceived, and ye turn aside, and serve other gods, and worship them;

Job 15:31 – Let not him that is deceived trust in vanity: for vanity shall be his recompence.

Luk 21:8 – And he said, Take heed that ye be not deceived: for many shall come in my name, saying, I am Christ; and the time draweth near: go ye not therefore after them.

1Co 6:9-10 – Know ye not that the unrighteous shall not inherit the kingdom of God? Be not deceived: neither fornicators, nor idolaters, nor adulterers, nor effeminate, nor abusers of themselves with mankind, nor thieves, nor covetous, nor drunkards, nor revilers, nor extortioners, shall inherit the kingdom of God.

1Co 6:11-12 – And such were some of you: but ye are washed, but ye are sanctified, but ye are justified in the name of the Lord Jesus, and by the Spirit of our God. All things are lawful unto me, but all things are not expedient: all things are lawful for me, but I will not be brought under the power of any.

1Co 15:33 –  Be not deceived: evil communications corrupt good manners.

Gal 6:7 –  Be not deceived; God is not mocked: for whatsoever a man soweth, that shall he also reap.

Rev 18:23 – And the light of a candle shall shine no more at all in thee; and the voice of the bridegroom and of the bride shall be heard no more at all in thee: for thy merchants (corporations) were the great men (artificial persons) of the earth; for by thy sorceries (pharmacopeia) were all nations deceived.

–=–

There is only one Law of Existence, of Nature, of Reality. The word Law is hardly adequate to describe It, for what word can possibly define what is self-Evident? This self-Existent (non-man-made) Order or Design is called as God’s Law, for God Is Reality, Is Truth, Is Nature, and Is All self-Existence — all that is not man-made. This Order of Nature, called as the Law of Nature (God), stands in self-evidence without exception, and is not alterable by men or by the artificial laws invented by men. All other so-called law is man-made, is consensual, voluntary, temporary, meaning that it must be contracted like any disease. And like a disease, man’s law will die without a host, without a volunteer, without victims; but only if you stop respecting it as Real, as part of God’s Nature. It always requires the breaking with the Law of God (Nature). There are no exceptions. There is no other law (doctrine) that does not specifically require one to break the Law of God, for no law of man is a self-evident part of God, that is, of Existence (Truth). No law of man is also a Law of Nature. There is no purpose for any law invented by man except to break the Law of God. There is no permit or license that is not intended to break with the Law of God. There is no legal person, place, or thing (name/noun) that is not intended to exist outside of the Realm and thus Law of God’s Nature. There is no positive invention by man that is not intended to control, harness, deceive, or destroy that which is a negative (already Existing) Creation of God. Man can only create artifice (art), and another word for art is technology. Only when mans creation is in harmony with and designed to protect and serve Nature can it be of the Will and Testament (Law/Word) of God. All of this is self-evident Truth, for the only Truth is God and that which is Created under and in harmony with Its Law. God does not invent, only man does.

The fool may consider such rhetoric to be a form of circular logic (dialectic). And yet no logic of man need be applied to the self-Existence of Godly things (of Nature). The circular notion of false logic is apparent by the flaws of its argument in referential to man-made (artificial) support for its accuracy. No-one can argue that Nature, in any way, is illogical, nor especially unreasonable. Its Design is beyond man’s capability of comprehension by use of the vulgar languages (including mathamatics), as all spiritual things are. What appears to the sophist as a circular logic is the very power of the negative aspect of Nature, which cannot be defeated by any positive (invention of man), unless one consents to that legal (anti-God) “fact” or “invention/design.” But a fact is not a Truth, and no facts need Exist in Nature, for Existence itself is self-evident Truth. Truth (God) needs no positively considered or pretended facts to Exist, and neither therefore does man. And that’s the point! That’s the power of God (Truth) — of being an anonymous part of God and thus part of and under the authority of the only whole and Highest Truth. In a spiritual and yes even circular way, one is protected from all lies when one remains in this circle of Truth, never allowing fiction and lies to break that spiritual circle. As they say, the Truth will set you free. For this circle is Real. It is Reality; the cycle of Nature. It is the realm of those who Live in and by the Grace of God and never accept what man has to offer in contract and thus become bound under the law of contracts (persons). For remember, a contract is only needed for those who seek to break with the Will and Testament (Law) of God, of self-government, of Love, Charity, Trust, Truth, and self-discipline. There are no contracts in Nature, in Love, in Charity, nor especially in Forgiveness. Understand this, and you may then literally and spiritually “under-stand” God’s Law. But if you comprehend it without applying it, you are indeed the very definition of a hypocrite (idolator).

–=–

“A contract founded on a base and unlawful consideration, or against good morals, is null.”

–Contractus ex turpi causa, vel contra bonos mores nullus est.  Hob. 167; Dig. 2, 14, 27, 4.

–=–

“The law never suffers anything contrary to truth. But sometimes it allows a conclusive presumption in opposition to truth.”

–Contra veritatem lex numquam aliquid permittit. ” 2 Co. Inst. 252. 24 See 3 Bouv. Inst. n. 3061.

–=–

“The agreement of the parties overcomes or prevails against the law.” 

–Conventio vincit legem. 2 Story, Ag. § See Dig. 16, 3, 1, 6.

–=–

The foundational maxims of law do not suffer anything that is not of the realm of Truth. But when a man can be tricked and deceived into entering into the legal contracts of the devil (attorneys), then this maxim invoking the power of Truth is bypassed. The law will suffer anything you can be deceived into accepting and volunteering for. For under contract, the Armor of Truth (God) is stripped from every man.

To avoid what is avoidable (man’s inventions and false, legal law) one must consciously avoid it. But once we accept or contract into what is avoidable, namely fraud, what is avoidable becomes unavoidable. This is where most of us stand. We are accepting and participating contractually in fraud (hypocrisy). The contract is valid because we don’t call it what it is. And if we do, if we understand the fraud, none of us are acting morally against it. Words are idols if those words are not acted upon, and so calling something as fraud while still acting in it is idolatry. Thus, we are still volunteering in that which is avoidable, for to nullify an immoral or otherwise unlawful contract under both realms of the law one must act with moral rectitude in opposition and avoidance against it. We are not doing so. The contract is lawful as long as the parties agree to it. And our agreement comes not in the form of words, but in the form of our actions in support of those legal (artificial) words. Contracts are excuses not to act under God’s Law. We act in the fraud, that is, in legal persona, therefore we accept the fraud. We pretended to become the fiction (person/title) and continue to pretend to be it. In other words, we are not following Christ (God’s Law), and are instead accepting the false, legal law (doctrine) of men. The legal system cannot be made null until men stop acting legally within it (against God’s Nature and Law). And most importantly, we cannot worship God nor follow Christ (Law) while acting in a legal persona (mask) that is required as property (status inside) of government to follow the legal, man-made, anti-God, antichrist, false law of men.

This was and is the reason behind the New Law, the New Testament, the allegorical blood sacrifice of Jesus Christ (Logos). We are part of the story. We were, through and because of the sacrifice of Logos, given cosmic free will. We were given the ability to attempt to break with the Law of Nature in a legal matrix of total self-deceit, though in Reality this is impossible. We were allowed to play the fool. But once we recognize ourselves as the fool, as I have recognized myself to be, it’s this point in our lives that we must either die to the secular world in order to find spiritual Life under God and Its Law, or we will continue, as so many of us are, to live by the deceits of the flesh in self-deceit and in hypocrisy.

If you’ve read this up to this point, then you know right now whether you are a hypocrite like me, or you are a son of God. If you are pretending to be the idol of a “Christian” then you know that such a placed upon yourself as a flattering title is either well-deserved by your actions or is carried in deceit as a false show in idolatry. And finally, you know now that the Bible cannot be dismissed as religious nonsense, and that should you choose to lift yourself out of this voluntary self-deceit that it’s you and only you that has the power to become Christ-like, to make the allegory of Christ become your own True story. You have the Armor. Now you must decide to bear it or throw it off for the sins (untruths) of the secular world.

And if you’re honest with yourself right now, you know the Truth is that you already know the answer, you already know your decision, because you already know the path, and from this point on you are either on that path or you are not. For most of you, including myself, this is what it feels like to Truly be a hypocrite.

Welcome to hell…

.

–Clint richard-son (realitybloger.wordpress.com)
–Wednesday, August 21st, 2019

 

Advertisements

Orwell’s New Law: Intolerance Is Tolerance


—=—

“A man in debt is so far a slave.”

—Ralph Waldo Emerson

—=—

I’ve got something to say, and you probably aren’t going to like it. And try as you will to dispute it, the Truth is a piercing sword, unable to be deflected even in this time of great deceit — this grand delusion.

Yes, freedom is slavery. It’s called the commercial franchise of national citizenship (legally called as freedom), a reimagined form of denizenship as a post-modern neo-feudalistic form of the same old debt-slavery of yesteryear.

Yes, we understand that war is peace. These are merely the two different extremes of a legally (secularly) bound international commerce, the state of war being a violent purge of uncooperative nations or people (tribes) seeking independence from a slave-inducing, interconnected world currency and its performance-debtor slave system through extortive taxation and internationally imposed sanctions. When the violent, murderous trade war ceases, the then subdued, defeated nations submit to the usual forced but supposedly voluntary “peace” of commerce via international trade yet again. The difference between war and peace is merely a declaration of one or the other, though both have the same goal, to profit the elite bloodlines of archons behind nation-building and United Nations programs that assure free-flowing commerce (peace) between those internationally bound corporations (nations).

And yes, we have witnessed globally that ignorance is strength. But this phenomenon is only understandable from the perspective of national governments toward their enslaved, enfranchised (free range) masses (common human live-stock), as we are hopelessly educated and entrained by entertainments and standardized, institutionalized lies (also called history), and of course what is quickly becoming our very own censored, institutionalized newspeak. My people around the world are, without a doubt, being destroyed and controlled through a mandated, standardized system that teaches and instills a guaranteed lack of knowledge. It’s called public education.

But there is an underlying Orwellian, that is, dystopian maxim that stands as the foundation for all of this, the source behind all three of these seemingly paradoxical but fully demonstrable states of induced, artificial existence detached from Nature (God), which have led to this now globalist Newspeak society we pretend to exist in. There is one ingredient, one agenda that must be pushed universally for this trifecta of dark, globalist tyranny to prevail…

There must be a despotically enforced, unequivocal (absolute) state of artificial, passively consented-to tolerance.

—=—

Our rulers can have no authority over natural rights,
only as we have submitted to them
.
The rights of conscience we never submitted.
We are answerable for them to our God.
The legitimate powers of government extend
to such acts only as injurious to others
.”  

—Thomas Jefferson

—=—

What is the highest moral (Natural) Law? To do no harm, without exception, including the use of words as weapons.

What do the governments of men thrive upon? Doing harm, and more specifically causing us all to harm one another in any way legally possible (permissively through words) as a dysfunctional lifestyle. In other words, creating and administering dystopia — a debtor’s hell.

Our society is like a poker game, consisting of a set of neighbors (players/actors) that pretend a sort of cordial camaraderie and shallow friendship while secretly seeking to competitively out-do, defeat, destroy, and bankrupt each other. Every player at the poker table is necessarily, situationally, and by disposition subjected into being a member of the anti-cult of the Joneses, always seeking to one-up each other, prideful and miserly of their continued earnings, existing solely for the purpose of profit and gain. Meanwhile, the dealer (government and banker) sets and administrates the rules of this necessary, mutually required illicit conduct, allowing legally (permissively) this abhorrent behavior within a prescribed, licensed set of rules. For this administrative “service” the dealer (government) legally steals (taxes) for its own profit the total wealth spent in each transaction (poker hand), raking in a small percentage from each round of cards (commerce) being dealt for the house — an administrative fee, of course. But as the total money left on the table is constantly diminished by this house service charge (called the take), each neighbor must constantly refresh the money pool with his own savings or, finally, leave bankrupt (as a broke loser). Essentially, this is how governments corral and subjugate their common citizenry, setting the rules of “commerce” (the rules of the game) so that we are all constantly practicing deceit and treachery toward one another while feigning to be good neighbors, the ultimate hypocrisy (simulation). It’s just business, we are entrained to say, as if this is some viable excuse to break the highest law of Nature (God) to love your neighbor, to do no harm, and to act always in love, charity, and forgiveness. But, of course, there would be no poker games or need for government if this moral, spiritual, “unwritten” Law was respected absolutely. Gambling, as does citizenship, requires God’s Law (and therefore natural rights) to be trampled underfoot. In legality, the only duty that can be found is the taxation laid upon us all. Instead of acknowledging and fulfilling our moral duty to all men, we pay a duty (tax) so that we don’t have to. Legalism is, after all, the undoing of God’s (Nature’s) Law.

The point? The legal law can only control us if we can be made to voluntarily, continuously harm and injure one another through legal (man-made) methods of false law. To injure, in legalism, means to bring someone or something IN to and therefore under the legal LAW (jure) by means of invoking it in commerce (contract), or in other words by causing all actions of men to be done through a government assigned, artificial, legal persona (mask) — men acting not in Nature (under God and Its Higher Law) but instead in legal (artificial) persona, a false “strawman” that is property of the commercialized corporation of government. We tolerate harm in every way, to each other and to ourselves, as if it’s a normal, or even natural part of “life” as citizenships (debt-slaves). We are acting as commercial vessels, and therefore, as feudal vassals.

VASSALnoun – 1: A person under the protection of a feudal lord to whom he has vowed homage and fealty: a feudal tenant2: One in a subservient or subordinate position. (–Webster’s Dictionary Online, current)

—=—

Maxim of law: With protection comes subjection (subservience/subordination).

In other words, by doing all things commercially in a false, legal persona (status, which is property of government), all actions done by national “citizens” are considered as being legally protected under international law, and, as the maxim of law goes, with protection comes subjection. You see, this maxim applies to both men and the persons (legal status) men pretend to act within, which inversely means that to have the protection of God (Natural rights), one must subject oneself only to the Law of Nature (God), never to what is legal (anti-God, anti-Nature). And so, having legal protection as “consumers” in commerce requires voluntary personhood (legal existence/status) and subjection to the false gods (magistrates) of government. The concept is not at all different, metaphorically speaking, as being either an angel or a demon. Both answer to their perspective gods and are bound by the law thereof. The personification of the angel guides men towards the Law of Nature while the demon (devil) drives men towards the big lie, the artificial aspect of false existence (citizenship in personhood) separated from Nature (God) and Its Law. The angel exists only in Nature (Reality) and may only influence and guide men towards Nature (God) and Its Law. But the demon exists only in fiction, in legal commerce, unable to do anything to men in Nature nor effect the Natural (God-given) rights of men (to do no harm) unless men can be deceived and tricked into entering into the legal, artificial realm (hell) via commercial contract, including citizenship to the legalist, secular nations. Nature (God) is Truth. Legalism is always a lie. One cannot have two opposing gods (masters), nor can one practice two opposing laws. One cannot claim the Natural rights emanating from Nature (God) while acting in an unnatural state of false existence (persona) and following only the law governing fiction. One cannot follow the Law of Nature (God) while also following its complete, intentional opposite, the law of men (legalism). And while the True intent of the concept of possessing the Natural (God-given) right of freedom of religion only exists in Nature, under God (as the practice only of the Law of Nature and exemption from legal, manmade sanctions), legalism only exists outside of and without God, without the Law of Nature. Legal law is a pretended exemption from the Law and Laws of Nature (God). It is really just satanism in disguise, for the meaning of the word satan is merely that which is adversarial to God (Nature/Truth) and Its Law. In legalism, the legal terminology (trickery) “freedom of religion” actually means freedom from religion, or in other words, freedom from Nature (God) and Its Law. All legal, commercial law necessarily defies, opposes, and abandons what is Nature (God) and Its Law, for all legal persons, places, and things (nouns/names) are false. In Nature, all of Existence (Creation) is anonymous, nameless, and therefore carries no mark, no blemish, and no sign of legal property. Nothing in Nature is property of man. Only legal (artificial) persons, places, and things (names placed upon Reality) are property (creations of) men. And so, when the Law of Nature is transmuted, reconstituted, and thus perverted from Nature (God) into commercial (legal) code, and when men can be tricked into following this artificial code instead of the actual Law of Existence (God), then men carry the delusion that all of Nature, including themselves, are property of some commercial government corporation. Every tree, plant, animal, element, and living creature has been blemished with a legal name (noun/”thing”). Every geographical area of Nature (God) has been bestowed a legal name (noun) designating it a “place” or jurisdiction. And every man has been given an additional name (noun) and other marks that identify us all as some form of legal persona (noun/name). Therefore, through this word-trickery or word-majick of the legal language, all parts of Nature have been claimed as the property of mans creations, of artificial persons (corporations) created by the governments of men.

—=—

“The great enemy of the truth is very often not the lie –
deliberate, contrived and dishonest – but the myth,
persistent, persuasive, and unrealistic.
Belief in myths allows the comfort of opinion
without the discomfort of thought.”

–John F. Kennedy

—=—

We have allowed hell on Earth to come into existence, and we follow its pretenders, its false gods (magistrates) and legal codes as its vassals in an open-air debtors prison. And we have been so far separated from our own Nature (God) by this mythos that even the idea of self-governing under the Law of God by claiming what is inherently ours, that is, our only actual God-given (Natural) right that is to do no harm, no longer exists as even a possibility, for to exist in and under the artifice of nations and legal law we must therefore cause continuous harm to one another. To get ahead one must, either unwittingly or with deceitful understanding, harm all others. To make money (mammon) one must charge usury and act in grocery (harm/evil). And to have wealth as “property” (in mammon) one must act according to the dictates of lust, of greed, and of purposeful antagonism toward the Law and Laws of Nature (God). Citizenship, by its artificial nature, is the seven deadly sins all tied up in one corporate employment to “the state.”

And that’s just what it is: employment. A citizenship is an employee of its government, an agent to its principal. And an employee has no choice. An employee must act the part he or she is playing. A citizenship of a nation (corporation) has no right and no authority to act under Gods (Nature’s) Law. Moral choice is against the legal law. Not moral thought, only the right to act on that moral thought is taken away. Let’s face it… the continuity of government depends solely on men not acting upon their moral conscious against it. And this is the very purpose behind the multitude of false religions married (incorporated) under the legal state – belief without acting on that belief. In other words, hypocrisy (simulation) at its worst.

It is the element of choice that Truly validates ones actions. Legalism takes away choice, and often forces us to do the opposite of what we would otherwise choose to do. Choice is an illusion while we are plugged-in to The Matrix (legal simulation).

The following cannot be feigned or forced by legal sanction. They must come from the soul. They must come from the conscious mind of men, not as a bylaw of a corporation through fictional persons in simulation. For these are “family values” not corporate rules.

Lust is defeated by self-control, that is, self-government, chastity.

Gluttony is defeated by temperance, in serving others before ourselves.

Greed is cured by charity in all things, by putting the needs of others before ourselves.

Sloth is ceased when one has zeal, a zest and respect for all life, and diligence toward the needs of others.

Wrath, as anger toward another, is defeated by patience, by empathetic understanding of the disposition of others.

Envy has no place when the desire to help others succeed is more powerful than the desire to defeat, compete, or otherwise supersede them.

And pride can hold no man’s ego when one stands always in perspective humility, instead standing always in the attitude of service to all men and all True Existence (Nature/God).

The legal person is all of these in one, by legal requirement and/or as a result of the legal code, causing lustful and self-serving (glutinous) behavior, creating greed as intention and sloth as consequence, where lawyers capitalize and promote wrathful thought for profit and gain, playing perfectly into the resultant envy promoted by entertainment, advertising, and educational institutions, all packaged up in a fervent, national pride that necessarily excludes all others in the world not of the same pretended ethnicity (nationality). Personhood is legalized sin. Personhood is spiritual death.

The poker player would never follow these self-evident Laws of Nature (God), and neither can the citizenship of the nations of mammon. To succeed in mammon, all of these must be put aside to make room for evil intent, coveting after the false god of money.

Aristotle, who apparently penned the Nicomachean Ethics, expounds on what is the nature of actions in volunteerism, what is involuntary, and what he calls the non-voluntary aspects of the dualistic nature of these behaviors, which generally reflect the Law of Nature (God) as virtue (need) and the legal, commercial drive as the excess (desire/want) and/or deficiency that is expressed by a lack thereof in each virtue. Listed below, the “mean” category signifies a natural, reasonable balance between the excess and the deficiency. Of course, the legal system as commerce seeks to exploit the excess and the deficiency of moral character, just as one would expect from the demons of legalism, of those who seek to gain and promote the purely secular, legal ideal and lifestyle of their own version of “freedom of religion,” legally meaning freedom from the Law of God (Nature), legally licensed freedom from personal responsibility towards other men and from self-government (self-control under the moral Law). What is a legal version is never the same and always opposed to that which it simulates in hypocrisy.

Here I have listed these ethical principles along with the Webster’s 1828 Dictionary of the English Language definition of each term, which also reflects the same moral ethic in Biblical terms. When reading these, it must be from the perspective that each extreme represents the two trays of a scale, whereupon that scale tips in the favor of spirituality under God (the Law of Nature) and its opposing force of secularism under legalism (fallacious logic as the law of men). Yet too much of even the spiritually minded concept may cause men to act just as foolishly as the secularist extreme of that scale. It is balance we seek, not perfection. And this balance is self-governance under God’s Law (of Nature).  However, do not be fooled by the notion that legalism offers a counter-balance to perfection. That is not its design. Its design is to tip the scale in only one direction at all times, while simulating a religious foundation of moral equivalence and manifest destiny. This is a lie told by the king of lies, by men seeking power through the destruction of your ability to self-govern, and by taking you away from God (Nature) through false denominations (empty names) of the false doctrines of corporate religion. In other words, legalism is designed to keep you at all times spiritually unbalanced. All of these expressive traits, again, are based on choice. Legalism offers no choice, while the Law of God relies only on your choice to follow It or turn away from it towards the artificial construct of a legalistic lifestyle in spiritual death.

–=–

COURAGE – noun – [Latin, the heart.] Bravery; intrepidity; that quality of mind which enables men to encounter danger and difficulties with firmness, or without fear or depression of spirits; valor; boldness; resolution. It is a constituent part of fortitude; but fortitude implies patience to bear continued suffering. Courage that grows from constitution, often forsakes a man when he has occasion for it; courage which arises from a sense of duty, acts in a uniform manner. Be strong and of good courage Deuteronomy 31:6. (Websters1828)

Concerned with Mean Excess Deficiency
fear (phobos) Courage (andreia): mean in fear and confidence First Type. Foolhardy or excessive fearlessness; is one who over indulges in fearful activities. Cowardly (deilos): exceeds in fear and is deficient in confidence
confidence (thrasos) Second Type. Rash (thrasus): exceeds in confidence

–=–

TEMPERANCE – noun – [Latin temperantia, from temper.] 1. Moderation; particularly, habitual moderation in regard to the indulgence of the natural appetites and passions; restrained or moderate indulgence; as temperance in eating and drinking; temperance in the indulgence of joy or mirth. Temperance in eating and drinking is opposed to gluttony and drunkenness, and in other indulgences, to excess. 2. Patience; calmness; sedateness; moderation of passion. He calm’d his wrath with goodly temperance. [Unusual](Websters1828)

Concerned with Mean Excess Deficiency
pleasure (hēdonē)
and pain (lupē)
Temperance (sōphrosunē) Profligacy, dissipation, etc. (akolasia) scarcely occurs, but we may call it Insensible (including a lack of empathy, happiness from doing harm)(anaisthētos)

–=–

LIBERALITY – noun – [Latin liberalitas. See Liberal.] 1. Munificence; bounty. That liberality is but cast away, which makes us borrow what we cannot pay. 2. A particular act of generosity; a donation; a gratuity. In this sense, it has the plural number. A prudent man is not impoverished by his liberalities. 3. Largeness of mind; catholicism (universalism); that comprehensiveness of mind which includes other interests beside its own, and duly estimates in its decisions the value or importance of each. It is evidence of a noble mind to judge of men and things with liberality. Many treat the gospel with indifference under the name of liberality. 4. Candor; impartiality. (Websters1828)

Concerned with Mean Excess Deficiency
giving and getting (smaller amounts of) money liberality (Rackham),
generosity (Sachs) (eleutheriotēs)
prodigality (Rackham),
wastefulness (Sachs) (asōtia)
meanness (Rackham), stinginess (Sachs) (aneleutheria)

–=–

MAGNIFICENCE – noun – [Latin magnificentia.] Grandeur of appearance; greatness and splendor of show or state; as the magnificence of a palace or of a procession; the magnificence of a Roman triumph. (Websters1828)

Concerned with Mean Excess Deficiency
giving and getting greater things Magnificence (megaloprepeia) Tastelessness (apeirokalia) or Vulgarity (banausia) Paltriness (Rackham), Chintziness (Sachs) (mikroprepeia)

–=–

MAGNANIM’ITY – noun – [Latin magnanimitas; magnus, great, and animus, mind.] Greatness of mind; that elevation or dignity of soul, which encounters danger and trouble with tranquillity and firmness, which raises the possessor above revenge, and makes him delight in acts of benevolence, which makes him disdain injustice and meanness, and prompts him to sacrifice personal ease, interest and safety for the accomplishment of useful and noble objects. (Websters1828)

Concerned with Mean Excess Deficiency
great honor (timē) and dishonor Greatness of Soul (megalopsuchia)
(Traditional translation “magnanimity”. Sometimes “pride”.)
Vanity (chaunotēs) Smallness of Soul (self-hatred)(mikropsuchia)

–=–

AMBITION – noun – [Latin ambitio, from ambio, to go about, or to seek by making interest, of amb, about, and eo, to go. See Ambages. This word had its origin in the practice of Roman candidates for office, who went about the city to solicit votes.] A desire of preferment, or of honor; a desire of excellence or superiority. It is used in a good sense; as, emulation may spring from a laudable ambition. It denotes also an inordinate desire of power, or eminence, often accompanied with illegal means to obtain the object. It is sometimes followed by of; as, a man has an ambition of wit. Milton has used the word in the Latin sense of going about, or attempting; but this sense is hardly legitimate. (Websters1828)

Concerned with Mean Excess Deficiency
lesser honor (timē) and dishonor no special term in ancient Greek for the right amount of ambition Over-ambitiousness) (philotimos) lack of ambition (aphilotimos)

–=–

GENTLENESS noun – [See Gentle.] Dignity of birth. [Little used.] 1. Genteel behavior. 2. Softness of manners; mildness of temper; sweetness of disposition; meekness. The fruit of the Spirit is love, joy, peace, long suffering, gentlenessgoodness, faith. Galatians 5:223. Kindness; benevolence. 4. Tenderness; mild treatment. (Websters1828)

Concerned with Mean Excess Deficiency
anger (orgē) Gentleness (praotēs) Irascibility (Rackham), Irritability (Sachs) (orgilotēs) Spiritlessness (aorgẽsia)

–=–

FRIENDLINESS – noun – 1. A disposition to friendship; friendly disposition. 2. Exertion of benevolence or kindness. (Websters1828)

Concerned with Mean Excess Deficiency
general pleasantness in life Friendliness (something like philia) First Type. obsequious (areskos), if for no purpose quarrelsome (duseris) and surly (duskolos) (contrarian)
Second type. flatterer (kolax), if for own advantage

–=–

TRUTHFUL – adjective – Full of truth. (Websters1828)

TRUTH – noun – 1. Conformity to fact or reality; exact accordance with that which is, or has been, or shall be. The truth of history constitutes its whole value. We rely on the truth of the scriptural prophecies. My mouth shall speak truth. Proverbs 8:7. Sanctify them through thy truth; thy word is truth. John 17:172. True state of facts or things. The duty of a court of justice is to discover the truth. Witnesses are sworn to declare the truth the whole truth and nothing but the truth 3. Conformity of words to thoughts, which is called moral truth. Shall truth fail to keep her word? 4. Veracity; purity from falsehood; practice of speaking truth; habitual disposition to speak truth; as when we say, a man is a man of truth. 5. Correct opinion. 6. Fidelity; constancy. The thoughts of past pleasure and truth. 7. Honesty; virtue. It must appear, That malice bears down truth. 8. Exactness; conformity to rule. Plows, to go true, depend much on the truth of the iron work. [Not in use.] 9. Real fact of just principle; real state of things. There are innumerable truths with which we are not acquainted. 10. Sincerity… 13. It is sometimes used by way of concession… That is, it is a truth; what you have said, I admit to be true. In truth in reality; in fact. Of a truth in reality; certainly. To do truth is to practice what God commands. John 3. (Websters1828)

Concerned with Mean Excess Deficiency
truth (alēthēs) Truthfulness (alētheia) Boastfulness: pretense as exaggeration (alazoneia) Self-deprecation: pretense as understatement (eironia, same word as “irony“)

–=–

WITTY – adjective – [from wit.] 1. Possessed of wit; full of wit; as a witty poet. 2. Judicious; ingenious; inventive. 3. Sarcastic; full of taunts. (Websters1828)

WIT – verb intransitive – [G., to know. See Wise.] To know. This verb is used only in the infinitive, to wit namely, that is to say. [Latin] – noun [See the verb and Wise.] 1. Primarily, the intellect; the understanding or mental powers. Will puts in practice what the wit deviseth. For wit and power their last endeavors bend to outshine each other. 2. The association of ideas in a manner natural, but unusual and striking, so as to produce surprise joined with pleasure. wit is defined. What oft was thought, but neer so well expressed. Wit consists in assembling and putting together with quickness, ideas in which can be found resemblance and congruity, by which to make up pleasant pictures and agreeable visions in the fancy. Wit consists chiefly in joining things by distant and fanciful relations, which surprise us because they are unexpected. Wit is a propriety of thoughts and words; or in other terms, thoughts and words elegantly adapted to the subject. 3. The faculty of associating ideas in a new and unexpected manner. 4. A man of genius; as, the age of Addison abounded with wits. A wit herself, Amelia weds a wit. 5. A man of fancy or wit. Intemperate wits will spare neither friend nor foe. 6. Sense; judgment. He wants not wit the danger to decline. 7. Faculty of the mind. 8. Wits, in the plural, soundness of mind; intellect not disordered; sound mind. No man in his wits would venture on such an expedition. Have you lost your wits? Is he out of his wits? 9. Power of invention; contrivance; ingenuity. He was at his wits end. (Websters1828)

CHARMING – participle present tense – 1. Using charms; enchanting. 2. adjective – Pleasing in the highest degree; delighting. Music is but an elegant and charming species of elocution. (Websters1828)

CHARM – noun – 1. Words, characters or other things imagined to possess some occult or unintelligible power; hence, a magic power or spell, by which with the supposed assistance of the devil, witches and sorcerers have been supposed to do wonderful things. Spell; enchantment. Hence, 2. That which has power to subdue opposition, and gain the affections; that which can please irresistible; that which delights and attracts the heart; generally in the plural. The smiles of nature and the charms of art. Good humor only teaches charms to last.  verb transitive – 1. To subdue or control by incantation or secret influence. I will send serpents among you – which will not be charmed. Jeremiah 8:172. To subdue by secret power, especially by that which pleases and delights the mind; to allay, or appease. Music the fiercest grief can charm. 3. To give exquisite pleasure to the mind or senses; to delight. We were charmed with the conversation. The aerial songster charms us with her melodious notes. 4. To fortify with charms against evil. I have a charmed life, which must not yield. 5. To make powerful by charms. 6. To summon by incantation. 7. To temper agreeably. – verb intransitive – To sound harmonically. (Websters1828)

Concerned with Mean Excess Deficiency
pleasantness and social amusement Wittiness (Rackham)

Charming (Sachs) (eutrapelos)

Buffoonery (bõmolochia) Boorishness (bõmolochos)

–=–

For further outline and elaboration of these ten books containing these virtues and their excess or deficiency from neutrality (middle, mean, balanced state), see the wiki article, here:

Link–> https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Nicomachean_Ethics

–=–

It is easy to confuse these terms with their legal opposites, word magic that is designed to simulate the form without the substance, to pretend good while acting badly. As an example, the legal system bestows the legal (false), flattering title of “honor” upon politicians and judges, as well as titles of supposed (pretended) nobility. One need not do anything special to be granted the flattering title of nobility, one may simply be born into it. Or, one may be hired on to the government corporations and be given such a legal title, which is a specifically defined term of art that has nothing to do with acting in honor in any way. This simulation (hypocrisy) is the nature of The Matrix story and movie franchise — a society so enamored in false, flattering titles that not one of us acts according to the title we pretend to bear. For while the words simulation and hypocrisy bear (carry) the same meaning, they are the products of very different intents. Hypocrisy is committed by a man that knows the Law of God (Nature) and continues knowingly and thus consciously to break that Law. But society today is in simulation, not hypocrisy. Simulation is committed by a man that does not know the Law of God except by name (form without substance), confused by legalism and false doctrine of state-sponsored religions, and therefore acts unknowingly and unconsciously to break the Law of God (Nature).

Which is worse? Why hypocrisy, of course, knowingly breaking the Law of Nature (God).

Which is more destructive? That would be simulation, for a simulator knows and acknowledges not his own hypocrisy, being inculturated and brainwashed by secular logic (legalism) and thus tricked into contract with the devils (attorneys/agents) of government – injured (brought into legal law) and submitted to a spiritually dead existence absent from Source (Nature). One that is ignorant, though this be no excuse, cannot be called a hypocrite. But he can be called evil, pernicious, and wanting of moral rectitude, as much as any farm animal might be labeled. For both exist in their own matrix simulation, an existence completely separate from Nature (Reality). One thing, however, is certainly clear… The ignorant simulators must be governed, for they cannot govern themselves if they do not know the Law of Nature (God). Trying to self-govern without God, without Logos (Christ, the Word of God personified), is like entering into a battle without a sword or shield. The piercing effect of legalism and mammon corrupts the empty mind, the mind devoid of knowledge. And we are certainly a people destroyed by our disgusting and purposeful lack of knowledge, our active ignorance.

(Author’s note: I just revealed the subject outline of my next book.)

It must be said that not any one of these virtues listed above can be obtained without the others. Each is like a check and balance upon which the others depend. For instance, one might be very witty and yet, without empathy, that is, without having temperance over ones words or actions, ones wit will certainly do harm to another or to oneself (self-deprecation). This dispensation of virtue is akin to having a shield against those seven deadly sins that the legal system thrives upon and invokes in each of us through its artificial matrix code. And so the worst of men rise to the top while the best of us are cowed and prevented from practicing this religious Law of virtuous ethics as religious men (non-persons). To be clear, the Law of Nature (God) is illegal in the legal system of men, for that is the purpose of having freedom from (of) religion, which means a state of possessing legal freedom from moral Law. Following the Law of God religiously is not a religion, it is conscious action and a fear of hypocrisy. The religions of men in no way require any man to follow the Law of God, and in fact require every man to break with God’s Law, the Law of Nature, in order to join and follow whatever false doctrine that “church” has printed, incorporated, and made legal (anti-God). Religion is steeped in and dependent on simulation and hypocrisy, for all its members and clergy must necessarily fall into one of these categories.

It is no irony that by doing no harm one therefore rises above and takes away all power of the legal governments of men, leaving the dealer (government) of the game without dependent, morally corrupted customers, without support, without players (citizen employees) in its organized, extortive, commercial business practices. A king, a government, and a poker dealer (tax collector) are useless and powerless actors without the multitude of weak-minded men paying them tribute by participating in their legal, permissive, monopolistic games so as to be harmful and be harmed as a defunct (spiritually dead), default lifestyle. Therefore, the legal system and its devilish law allows for, protects, and very much promotes injury and harm. To injure literally means to bring someone, some place, or some thing into law, and this usually means harm must be done to that legal (artificial) person (status), place (corporation), or thing (property). Though these are merely fictions of law (nouns/names), these pretended titles play an intricate role in this process, for they are all patented creations and property of government. The creator controls, as their well-established, ancient, legal maxim of law dictates. In other words, God controls Nature (including man) and Its Law, while governments control fiction (including the legal persons, places, and things of men) and the legal law that controls them. Through the fictional person, the man is controlled. Within the fictional place (legal jurisdiction of a municipal corporation) the person is governed (administrated). And through every false, legal claim of any thing as “property” by the fictional legal person in the fictional legal place, the man is therefore claiming that he or she holds “title” through some creation (persona) of government, and therefore the law of persons, places, and things is the highest – a false law held higher than Nature’s (God’s) Law. Ultimately this means that anyone that violates or trespasses upon that lie of fictionally entitled property must be punished, that is, harmed through extortion and pain. Forgiveness is not tolerated by we that justify, tolerate, and even worship patriotically this legal system, pretending God’s realm of Nature no longer exists when covered by a fictional, legal “property” line (artificial border) — that the Law of God’s Nature is equally defeated within that artificial boundary of legalism. Therefore, no moral action will be tolerated from any man because it’s illegal (intolerable) for a man bearing (using) a legal person (legal status) under and controlled (owned) by government to practice any form of True religious freedom (bound under moral, unwritten Law). What is legally written remains instead the foundational lie in which we trust.

A person (legal status) exists only in the legal fiction system (a fictional simulation created through legal code words), no differently than a Monopoly game game-piece only has power and status in the Monopoly game or a pawn or knight only has status as a pawn in the game of chess, being a useless trinket in Truth, that is, in Nature (under God), and having power only through the permissive (licensed) fiction that is man’s legal system of law. And so a man acting as/in legal persona (false character) can only act according to the law of persons, the law of the legal, commercial game, never the spiritual, moral Law of Nature (God). In other words, a man must tolerate everything that the government’s legal system of law requires its fictional persons (property) to tolerate, while inversely showing forced, equal, collective intolerance towards whatever government requires and considers as legally intolerable. Morals, values, spirituality, and just outright common sense are intolerable in any legal system. Why? Because these actions (not just thoughts) cannot be governed through legal means, only suppressed through rules attached to this persona (status in society). Only harm can be legally governed. And like a parasite, a vampiric ghoul, government capitalizes upon and taxes every instance of harm we do to one another, even going so far as to fill our heads with Hollywood (deceitful) entertainment that constantly promotes and features as “reality television” a host of paid, low-level, professional liars (actors) fulfilling quite scripted acts of competition and harm.

This is no game, this is the way of Nature (Jehovah). This is our actual default. Only the legal fiction prevents us from living Truly amongst one another in Love and Charity. And that fiction was created purposefully to destroy our spiritual release, our ability to Love and cherish each other as Real men, as Creations of God (Nature), entraining, educating, and tricking us into playing instead their legal game of monopolies (nations) by their artifices and false laws.

If this still doesn’t make sense, try and imagine a moral Monopoly or chess game for a moment, where the Highest rule of the game is to do no harm to any other player (man) or to the earth (Nature), where all “places” are only property of God and no other. Imagine playing Monopoly without money, without a banker (false god). Imagine if the dice had no power to move you and force you to harm (trespass) because you had no fictional character that, by the artificial (legal/man-made) law of that game, could control you through contract, bond, violence, and surety. Imagine having the Natural right and ability to travel through each pretended square of land because no legal system prevented it, and because the Law of the game is to do no harm, to forgive us our trespasses, and to love and respect one another as our neighbor and as we would expect to have done to ourselves? While this is the default Law of Nature, or in other words, what exists without the artifices of legal properties (persons, places, and things), it is only possible by conscious application (choice). It is only possible without temptation towards mammon (money and false valuation of what is Real as a fiction/name in commerce). It is only possible by men able to govern their own minds and actions, by men that hold the Highest Law not merely as a pretended belief system (religion) under a false corporate title like “Christian,” but as a lifestyle put into action at every moment of every new day. What games would we play if there was no competition? What wonders could we accomplish? What level of True Love could we experience?

Unfortunately, these questions cannot be answered while men are contracted with the dis-ease of legal personhood (status) under a false law, while inside the simulation of the legal matrix code and while entranced by the artifice of false, legally incorporated religions (belief without action). For the member of any religion is merely a citizen thereof, no different than that of a citizen of any nation, unable to ever act upon any moral law purveyed within that religion because that religion is a legal corporation bound wholly under legal law (IRS code), and the man attending that religious ceremony (game) is a legal citizen under legal (anti-God, anti-Nature) law. He that pretends, acts, and preaches falsely has no place in God’s Nature (Creation). The chess piece has no power except upon the chess board. The cartoon only exists in the cartoon realm. One cannot be a follower of the Law of God (exemplified in the story of Jesus Christ, the Law personified) and also pretend to be a legal person bound under legal law (false, antichrist doctrine). Each religion is a Monopoly board of its own, allowing empty belief in idols but preventing the ability of men to practice any moral actions as Law without license and permission from government. This false charity from religions can only serve to keep the poor in poverty, to fill the neglected belly of the hungry temporarily, without satisfaction, and provide only the illusion of shelter and love not as a duty to God, but as a gesture of empty, corporate greed (lust). Any welfare system provided by the corporate church serves only to support poverty, hunger, and homelessness, no less than the welfare system of the legal, corporate state serves only the continued base poverty level of its recipients. For money-based, corporate charity bound in anti-God legalism can never cure the ills of a society that worships and hoards the empty promise of money as its artificial god.

Government is only words on paper, and these words (false laws) are used by actors (politicians, police, etc.) in artificially flattering titles as justification to harm and injure the men who respect and therefore tolerate them as if their titles and legally licensed powers thereof are part of reality. This invisible badge of moral corruption, a public scarlet letter of moral incorrigibility called personhood (legalized adultery) and national US citizenship is expressed every time that status (legal, artificial persona) is invoked through identity (pretended sameness as a fictional character/name), such as showing a driver’s license or using a social security number. The law applies only to the person (fictional status), but the man acting in person is in a permanent state of injury (bound under legal law and sanction) by continued, assumed, permanent use (expression) of that persona (status) and the protection it tacitly imposes, being in bond and surety as a consequence of using another’s (government’s) property. Legal protectionism, that is, giving up liberty for security, replacing the choice of self-government with a legalistic prison in debt, is never a good thing.

And now, suddenly, the purpose of Thomas Jefferson’s quote above can be clearly understood. Your rulers use the premise of this quote against you, by causing you to abandon your natural (“God-given”) rights in exchange for their contracted dis-ease of legal, artificial rights. The devil (evil genius/attorneys) can only effect you when you get into contract with it. Legalism is intolerable to innocence. Satan requires harm be done so that its anti-God legalist law may govern and administrate that harm. With time or with money (which are the same thing), we all pay in the end.

Governments only have power over men that are weak-minded, ignorant, and warlike, men that cannot govern themselves, men that deny their own power and existence under God (in Nature/Reality). This unnatural state of being is purely a learned, societal behavior fomented on the “public” at large, for one cannot control (govern) he that is self-governing, unless that government first steals that man’s spiritual release and ability to practice any form of moral (unwritten, self-evident) Law. This is the absolute power behind the legal systems of men, a distinct lack of recognition and respect of the Law of Nature, the Law of God, and therefore the “God-given Rights” so often spoken about by the men that create governments. However, while they are happy to reserve these rights for themselves, the rest of us must be made to deny them and harm each other as a customary, common (vulgar) lifestyle in order that we may be ruled by the legalistic (man-made) rules of harm. We thrive on injury, because only through injury may we invoke and utilize the legal system. Without harm, it has no purpose. It cannot exist in a charitable society. It cannot thrive when forgiveness is the law. And it cannot control us unless we treat each other without love, as if we are not each other’s neighbors to love as we love ourselves. When our actions are no longer answerable only to Jehovah but to men pretending to be gods (magistrates/judges), then we no longer have Natural (God-given) rights. The second we invoke the legal system and law of men, we abandon all that is of God (Nature, the Universe), all that is the benefit of living in and speaking at all times the Truth. For God is Truth and the keeper of It. In other words, if we act like Lawless (soulless) animals then we shall be treated like Lawless (soulless) animals.

Governments, however, are not Truth. Governments exist and subsist solely on lies, on their own fictional inventions, and according to their own law. We seem to forget that every government in existence is immune from its own system of law, standing in the legal title of self-proclaimed, artificial, pretended sovereignty over its own property, its own false creation, including the persons (status in society) we pretend to be. We are told that we are each individually sovereign and yet also somehow subject to government, a blatant misnomer bordering on paradox. A man of God has only one Sovereign and it is never himself, for to have Natural (God-given) rights is to recognize Nature, that is the Universe as all True and self-evident Existence as a whole, as man’s only God (Sovereign). Nature is the only Truth. Truth is God. God is Truth. All else is manmade, and what is manmade is never Truth, never part of God, never part of or governed by Nature and Its Law. Therefore, what is manmade, including what we call persons or citizenship, is a lie. A lie is always against Truth. A lie is always against God’s Law. Lies are never part of Nature, thus never part of God. In other words, Truth is self-evident, and so Truth is the keeper of Itself, for Truth is the Nature and Law of the Universe (Jehovah). Man is part of Nature (God), part of Truth, and ultimately governed by Truth (Nature and Its Law), and so nothing manmade can be said to be part of God, for nothing manmade is part of (originated from) Nature (the Source of Truth). This is the essential foundation of law. Words are never Truth, only form without substance and without self-evidence. The Word of God is the Law of Truth, the Law (Logos) is the Son of God (Truth). The Word is the Law is the Son… these words carry the same meaning and Source. Whenever Truth is spoken, this is the Word of God. That which emanates Truth is acting in or speaking the Word of God, and is acting as a son of God, for God (Jehovah) is Truth. And one can self-evidently only have one True Origin, one Source, one Sovereign (God). All others are false (respected lies). This understanding does not require a degree, or even an education. It needs no religion or money-hungry, lust-addicted priest. It is a fundamental, self-evident Truth. It is the foundation of all Law, for the legal law only exists as that which is opposed to Truth. Life is spiritual Truth. Legal fiction is spiritual death. All persons (legal status under government) are fictions of law. All persons are dead. Persons are not of God, not Created from Nature (Universal Source). Persons are words, form without substance. Persons are Soulless…

If you think this is religion, you are hopelessly lost in the throws of legally imposed, active ignorance… dazed, and confused by the firm and fast grip of your lovelorn lips upon the teat of the false, legal gods of government (mammon).

—=—

“There is nothing more frightening than active ignorance.”

—Johann Wolfgang von Goethe

—=—

“We can easily forgive a child who is afraid of the dark; the real tragedy of life is when men are afraid of the light.” 

―Plato

—=—

“There is a cult of ignorance in the United States, and there has always been. The strain of anti-intellectualism has been a constant thread winding its way through our political and cultural life, nurtured by the false notion that democracy means that ‘my ignorance is just as good as your knowledge.” 

―Issac Asimov 

—=—

“There are two ways to be fooled. One is to believe what isn’t true; the other is to refuse to believe what is true.” 

―Soren Kierkegaard

—=—

“We are all born ignorant, but one must work hard to remain stupid.” 

―Benjamin Franklin

—=—

“The hardest thing to explain is the glaringly evident which everybody has decided not to see.” 

―Ayn Rand, The Fountainhead

—=—

“Five percent of the people think; 
ten percent of the people think they think; 
and the other eighty-five percent would rather die than think.” 

―Thomas A. Edison

—=—

“But you can’t make people listen.
They have to come round in their own time,
wondering what happened and why the world blew up around them…

―Ray Bradbury, Fahrenheit 451

—=—

“Being ignorant is not so much a shame, as being unwilling to learn.”

―Benjamin Franklin

—=—

“An age is called Dark, not because the light fails to shine, but because people refuse to see it.”

―James A. Michener

—=—

“To surrender to ignorance and call it God has always been premature, and it remains premature today. Faith is the great cop-out, the great excuse to evade the need to think and evaluate evidence. Faith is the belief in spite of, even perhaps because of, the lack of evidence.”

―Richard Dawkins

(Author’s Note: I do not adhere to Dawkins gibberish, and would give my left nut to “debate” him, that is, educate him and his hopeless cult-following on his fallacious rhetoric and active ignorance of the Bible story and purpose. But a Truth as this, spoken by any man, cannot be ignored lest one becomes ones own enemy. His words regard only empty, corporate religions and their flatteringly-titled followers, not the self-evidence of the Truths in the Bible. His whole pedestal relies on the “strawman argument” fallacy, arguing against the false gods/idolatry and empty images that corporate “Christians” and other religions believe faithfully without proof instead of correcting those false beliefs and instructing them in the Truth of the Bible. In this way, Dawkins is not a Truth-teller but an adversary to the Truth (God). Jehovah (God) is self-evident Truth, against which there is no debating, no versions, and is not to be confused with of defined or likened to false gods and idols. Jehovah is defined as self-Evidence, self-Existence, the Universe, Nature and Its Law, of which we are all undeniably part of in Oneness. The atheist can only exist because false religions exist. The atheist argument is only against some other man’s imagination, not the Bible Law read in proper context and understanding of the intent of its language and metaphor. Dawkins is the “fool” so often referred to therein, just as I was for believing his and other’s fallacious rhetoric instead of reading and committing to due diligence regarding the Bible. His comment above only applies to men tricked into believing the false, manmade doctrines and empty images of denominated, corporate, legalized religions, and has nothing to do with the Bible itself.)

—=—

Let us be clear that the story of Jesus Christ is a timeless (non-historical) story about the most intolerant dude I can think of, violently overturning the tables of the moneychangers and abhorring all men (fools) that acted and spoke against God’s Law, the Law of Nature, the self-evident Truth. Let us also be clear that Jesus Christ is the story of you, and me, the example of God’s Law, the Law of Nature we are to follow — haters of lies, artifice, and legal fiction, and intolerable to everything not of Truth (Jehovah). No one can possibly read the Bible as Law (doctrine) while at the same time thinking so-called “Christian” thoughts about the world (globalized, institutionalized, unspiritual secularism) around us. Christ tolerated no abhorrent behavior, constantly chastising and slyly convicting all “fools” and “hypocrites” that pretended (simulated), as many of us similarly do today, to be men of God (followers of God’s Law). Nothing in the Bible (Law) promotes tolerance. In fact, the very idea of tolerance is by its nature completely against the purpose of any and every system of law, save perhaps the corrupt legal systems of men that seek socialism, communism, and in general Orwellian despotism.

Tolerance is literally moral anarchy, that is, lawlessness to all sense of morality, and poisonous to any sort of spiritually driven values any people may collectively share — the very reason for creating a legitimate (Lawful) government. In other words, once the delusion of enforced, legalized tolerance (permission-based, protected, abhorrent behaviors and lifestyles) infiltrates what otherwise was “constituted” to be an otherwise intolerant society of men that base their participation in that society firstly on a Higher, unwritten, spiritually driven purpose, all hope of maintaining an unwritten, unspoken, unenforced moral order is diminished if not crushed, and such moral behavior is even outlawed by the legalist platform of protectionism (license) for bad behavior.

—=—

“…Shouldest thou help the ungodly, and love them that hate the LORD (Jehovah)? therefore is wrath upon thee from before the LORD (Jehovah)… Take heed what ye do: for ye judge not for man, but for the LORD (Jehovah), who is with you in the judgment… for there is no iniquity with the LORD our God, nor respect of persons, nor taking of gifts… Thus shall ye do in the fear of the LORD, faithfully, and with a perfect heart.”

–2 Chronicles 19:2

—=—

The natural (common/lower class) man is a spiritual monster. His heart is where his feet should be, fixed upon the earth; his heels are lifted up against heaven, which his heart should be set on. His face is towards hell; his back towards heaven. He loves what he should hate, and hates what he should love; joys in what he ought to mourn for, and mourns for what he ought to rejoice in; glories in his shame, and is ashamed of his glory; abhors what he should desire, and desires what he should abhor.”

—Thomas Boston, quoted from: ‘Augustus Toplady, Complete Works’

—=—

To tolerate the existence of evil in men is not the same as tolerating the evils emulated in their behavior. One is to act in charity and love to all men, to tolerate them in their ignorance and deprivation, but never to allow or justify it, and certainly not to love it. The verse above explains that much of the evil of men comes from their status in society, their person. The person acts not under God’s Law but under the government (mind control) of a false god (men acting as gods/magistrates). Love the man as God’s Creation, but never the fictional persona (mask) he pretends to be.

To legalize tolerance is to make lawful that which is intolerable. To legalize tolerance, that is, to force “citizens” to accept all creeds and lifestyles in false, forced legally sanctioned equality, is to abandon the Source of Law that would otherwise allow good men to fight against that evil. In every case throughout written history, this institutionalized tolerance has but one causal effect — to cause good, moral men to become intolerable to the secularized society created by the enforced tolerance thereof. He that refuses legalized, forced tolerance of that which is immoral must necessarily be labeled as intolerable. It is this phenomenon that we are witnessing in America today, and ultimately in all “first-world” nations around the world. It is this tolerance of evil, this bearing of false love for the deadly sins of men due to their false, legally protected persona, that is the antichrist spirit.

One example of this destructive toleration can be seen in what is called as “modern” or “impressionist” art. When the artist no longer paints the world according to its True beauty and wonder, no longer wishing to extend in his art the glory and harshness of Truth, and instead chooses to reinvent Reality (Creation) from his own palate of demented, alternative perspective or some drug-induced “impressionist” revisionism, we have the perfect example of the spiritual degradation that subsists through unrestricted tolerance, and indeed the protective admiration and promotion of tolerable immorality.

—=—

But it’s the consequences of such universally established tolerance in a legalist, secularized society that are the focus of this short essay. For with such a learned, propagandized, and subsequently violently enforced legalistic tolerance shrouded upon a once morally-driven people, whose spiritual foundation and standing in the Law of Nature (God) against what is otherwise intolerable has ultimately been cowed by such licensure of permissive, illicit behavior and idolatry — this once strong foundation of like-minded people must necessarily become intolerant even toward the expression of their own, natural, moral instinct. We must deny the Truth and accept what is false. Such toxic, societal (legal) tolerance causes immorality in the actions of all men regardless of their upbringing and dissuasiveness from their knowledge and baser instinct, causing a legally-induced, almost helpless automation of the man under the false law of forced permissiveness of all that is against reason, stultifying every “citizen” (employee/agent) into inaction and eventually into a shameful feeling of powerlessness, worthlessness, and helplessness as a normal state of mind.

Nineteen Eighty-Four (as Orwell presented) is not merely an inevitable future but a predictive programming of exactly what has incrementally been happening to us, here and now. Good men are afraid to stand up against such oppressive, fallacious public outcries and politically-driven catcalls as “anti-semitic” or “racist,” silenced by social justice campaigns designed to do nothing more than stifle any debate and suppress reasonable consideration. To those acting intolerably, those tolerating evils, their acts of non-toleration through the silencing of any moral opposition is golden. Once tolerance of evil becomes law, only then may evil reign, their actions governed strictly (without choice) by the legalist devils (attorneys) that protect and represent them. And, of course, this is all by design. For the very purpose for this word “racism,” a term and concept that simply cannot be found in older dictionaries or in societal history, is for the purposes of selective intolerance hidden behind the logical fallacy of the goodness of socialistically ingrained, universal tolerance.

 

—=—

So if all black people get organized as a group of flatteringly titled “black” people (an artificial “black” persona/mask/status), which must necessarily be non-white or any other skin-color, they can then collectively as “black” persons fight racism? But, wait a minute, isn’t that the definition of racism? Wasn’t that the model of America — to create a “white” (pure-blooded) country that enslaved “black” (tainted blood) persons of any skin color? Wasn’t America a bunch of “white” European persons (pure bloodline families) that came together in “solidarity” to form a country that necessarily excluded non-pure-blooded men no matter what the skin-color?

Is this race denial? Is it race shame? The strange thing is that this manipulative social justice movement has nothing at all to do with ending this left over, eugenically-driven racial hatred, that is, hatred between the so-called races, but rather to promote a hatred of the distinction of race itself, a sort of collective delusion of self-hatred and self-denial. In other words, we are being ingrained and inculturated to consider race (family) itself as intolerable — exactly what one would expect from a United Nations world government that wishes to replace the family unit with globalist, corporate feudalism and the state as parens patriae.

—=—

“The state has a wide range of power for limiting parental freedom and authority in things affecting the child’s welfare… In fact, the entire familial relationship involves the State.”

The primary control and custody of infants is with the government.”

“There is no wider area for the exercise of judicial discretion than that of providing for and protecting the best interests of children.”

“The court stands in the position of parens patria[e] of children.”

Parens patriae,” literally “parent of the country,” refers traditionally to role of state as sovereign and guardian of persons under legal disability.”

“Pursuant to the parens patriae doctrine, ‘the primary control and custody of infants is with the government, to be delegated, as of course, to their natural guardians and protectors, so long as such guardians are suitable persons to exercise it.’ ”

“In other words, the state is the father and mother of the child and the natural parents are not entitled to custody, except upon the state’s beneficent recognition that natural parents presumably will be the best of its citizens to delegate its custodial powers… ‘The law devolves the custody of infant children upon their parents, not so much upon the ground of natural right in the latter, as because the interests of the children, and the good of the public, will, as a general rule, be thereby promoted.’ 

–Prince, 321 U.S. at 167, 64 S.Ct. at 442, 88 L.Ed. 645. (SOURCE: FindLaw’s Appellate Court of Illinois case and opinions.) -and- MEADOWS v. MEADOWS, (Aug 2008), in the “Court of Civil Appeals of Alabama”?Tillman V. Roberts. 108 So. 62; Ex parte Handley, 460 So.2d 167 (Ala.1984). -and- –Ex parte Wright, 225 Ala. 220, 222, 142 So. 672, 674 (1932). See also Fletcher v. Preston, 226 Ala. 665, 148 So. 137 (1933); and Striplin v. Ware, 36 Ala. 87 (1860), -and- Ex parte Bayliss, 550 So.2d 986, 988 n. 1 (Ala.1989) (quoting Black’s Law Dictionary 1003 (5th ed.1979)). -and- Chandler v. Whatley, 238 Ala. 206, 208, 189 So. 751, 753 (1939) (quoting Striplin v. Ware, 36 Ala. at 89) (‘ ’). (SOURCE: FindLaw’s Court of Civil Appeals of Alabama case and opinions.)

—=—

Get it? The word public means corporation (artificial family) of lower class common men (goyim) acting in legal persona because of lack of knowledge and therefore inability to govern ourselves. The nation is a corporation, and the United Nations is a bunch of nations placed under the same matrix code. But what you might not know is that another word for corporation is FAMILY — as in surrogate parent under the doctrine of master and servant (also called as volunteerism). In the terms below, the word “pleasure” when used legally means legal use of a benefit, which implies the contractual relationship between person (agent) and the state (principal). So when your son takes a joy ride, it’s always considered corporate (family) business, and the head of the corporation (family) is the responsible party for any damages…

FAMILY GROUP – Within purview of the family car doctrine, is not confined to persons related to the owner, but includes members of the collective body of persons living in his household for whose convenience the car is maintained and who have authority to use it. The children of trust settlor including an adult son are members of the settlor’s “family group” for income tax purposes. (Black4)

FAMILY USE – That use ordinarily made by and suitable for the members of a household whether as individuals or collectively. The supply of water in a municipal corporation for family use includes the supply of jails, hospitals, almshouses, schools, and other municipal institutions; id. (Black4)

MEMBEROne of the persons constituting a family; a partnership, association, corporation, guild, etc. One of the persons constituting a court, a legislative assembly, etc. A part or organ of the animal body; especially a limb or other separate part. (Black4)

FAMILY PURPOSE DOCTRINE – A doctrine that the owner of a car, who gives it over to the use of his family and permits it to be operated by the members thereof, is liable for the injuries inflicted while being operated by a member of the family. The doctrine, that the owner of an automobile purchased or maintained for the pleasure of his family is liable for injuries inflicted by the machine while being used by the members of the family for their own pleasure. The doctrine imputes relationship of principal and agent where one maintains an automobile for pleasure or other use of member of his family. It is based on theory that each family member in using such car for own pleasure is carrying out the purpose for which it is furnished, and is the owner’s agent or servant. It is founded upon principles of agency or of master and servant. It is restricted to automobiles maintained by owner for comfort, pleasure, and convenience of members of his family. A father is not liable merely because he is head of family, but the one who owns or provides the automobile is liable. A wife may be held liable for the torts of her husband under the doctrine. Agency is the very genesis of the doctrine. Grandmother standing in loco parentis to grandson was liable under the doctrine for grandson’s negligent operation of her automobile. Where wife owned automobile, husband was not liable under “family purpose doctrine,” for minor son’s negligent operation of the automobile, notwithstanding husband paid part of gasoline and garage bills… (Black4)

FAMILY CAR DOCTRINE – The doctrine rests upon the basis that the automobile is furnished by the husband in his individual capacity and as common-law head of the family for the use of the family, and not as the agent of the community. It rests on theory that operator is husband’s agent and runs automobile in husband’sbusiness”; that wife is husband’s agent in carrying out one of the purposes for which the automobile is purchased and owned. Under the doctrine, a father furnishing automobile for pleasure and convenience of family makes the use of automobile by family his business and any member of family driving automobile with father’s express or implied consent is the father’s agent and the father is liable for the member’s negligence. See, also, Family Automobile Doctrine and Family Purpose Doctrine. (Black4)

FAMILY AUTOMOBILE DOCTRINE – The doctrine is that one who owns and maintains an automobile for the general use of his household makes use of automobile for such purposes a part of his business so that any member using automobile for those purposes under general authority to do so becomes his representative, for whose negligence he is responsible. It is an extension of the principle of respondeat superior to the relation created by operation of family use automobile. See, also, Family Car Doctrine and Family Purpose Doctrine. It is based on theory that members of family were engaged in a joint enterprise or that child was agent of parents. If an automobile is owned and maintained by a family corporation for general use of a family, such as that of corporation’s manager and one of its principal stockholders, corporation may be held liable under thefamily automobile doctrineto third parties. (Black4)

FAMILY CARAutomobile used to send owner’s children to school was “family car.” (Black4)

—=—

Yes, dropping the kids off at school in the “family car” is considered an act (benefit) of commerce, done in legal persona (citizenship), as the head of or agent (member) of a legal family of US persons (a legal marriage is the incorporation of two fictional, legal persons that are both property of the state). This is the family (artificially ethnic race) of the United States, all 300+ million of us — a family (corporation) born (birthed) without love and borne (carried) through great deceit and deception. The state (national district) is the father of its national citizenships.

And now you know why the scoundrels that started the United States were called as its “fathers” (false gods), and why the Bible insists that no man call any other but Jehovah (God) as “father.”

This artificial, national family (incorporation of persons) represents a politically-driven destruction of the recognition and proudness of heritage, family history, and age-old values. It’s what one might call the New World Order (international secularism), where all men identify as fictional (legal) persons and all such fictional persons are property (corporate employees called legally as sons and daughters) of the nation (family corporation).

The false paradigm we call as racism, or what is the modernly naked, left-over, legalistic “race” classifications of the original eugenics movement used without understanding today and therefore without reason or logic behind it, as a recognition of race detached from any actual family (bloodline/heraldic) considerations, being a mostly modern construct created by Darwin’s evolutionary charting of nonsensical traits and size variations of human skulls and intelligence quotients, indeed has an organized, sinister, secular-humanist goal that is not the imaginary, fairy-tail color-blindness promoted through televised hatred and logical fallacy we see and hear all over the “news” and as entertainment on social media. Rather, this so-called racism is a being served up as a deliciously delusional blindness to reality, to the beautiful Truth of Nature, as an institutionalized arrogance and indifference to God’s Design. Race (family) has nothing to do with it, except for the intention to destroy the True meaning of that word race in the minds of men, until it is unrecognizable as a good thing… or even acknowledgeable in public and political forums as a self-evident Truth.

In case you haven’t put the pieces together yet, legal “equality” is the direct opposite of race (family). In other words, equality = incorporation. Equality is necessary to destroy actual race, that is, to destroy the Real (bloodline) family unit, in order to cause all men to identify as legal entities instead of men of God (Nature), as equalized and thus normalized national citizens — artificial sons and daughters (persons) of the nation. This methodical averaging of the brain activity of children is much like the equalizer on a sound board or stereo, where all the frequency quotients can be flattened to the same level of unique output (zero), while certain individually wanted or preferred tones or traits can be notched up to acquire the desired effect. Before certain political groups or classes can be given more rights than all the other equally normalized citizenships, the group as a whole must be made to believe they are equal, even to the point of being required to hide or not to express those differences, be they knowledge or skill-based. Once the population is flattened, only then can a minority group be made to stand out and become unequal. There is no equality without inequity, for without that which is unequal to that which is forcibly declared and entrained to be equal there would be nothing to compare said label of equality to. In other words, to create a middle or lower class there must be a higher class, lest there be nothing to be lower than.

Public school, for instance, teaches all kids equally, so that no one kid can get ahead of the rest without reprimand. One size fits all — though completely and provably a failure of logic — is the delusional paradigm of this modern, humanist pedagogy. Humanism is the false religion of the atheist, the anarchist, the spiritually dead. The big bang is the religion of science. The singularity is the religion of the futurist, who’s spirit is devoid of and opposed to his own Source. Each wants to play god in a different way, and the education system is there to further the cause of this man-as-god mind-set. And through this institutionalization of legal (artificial) equality not of men but of legal, fictional (bloodless) persons in law, the foundation is laid to cause total inequity through such institutions as civil rights, that is, special rights for special groups that suddenly aren’t in any way equal anymore to the rest of the common, legalistic family. And so the values we associate with family (race) now come from the corporation nation, not the traditional values of our True family (race). In the end, the man that through legal personhood accepts artificial, legal equality with another man’s projected legal persona can never again claim God-given, Natural rights. For the source of the legal person is not God, not Nature, and no man may commune with God when acting in a lie, when acting in legal (anti-God) persona (mask). There is only one actual definition of the legal term equality, which is that all persons of the state stand with a required and equal punishment under the law. One that acts in equality instead of in True equity deserves not equity from others, for equity requires moral choice, and acting upon moral choice in the legal (immoral) realm is illegal.

And yet, in what seems a paradox, everywhere you look in Hollywood and its governmentally sponsored and controlled viral outlets of news and entertainment media one can find only the most blatant of race-baiting, and more specifically the demonization of any modicum of “white” racial, that is, cultural ethnicity and identity. Even so-called “white” people are learning to hate themselves for being “white,” though I’ve never actually met a “white person” in my life, since legal persons are only fictions of law. If Hollywood is to be believed in its re-writing and revisionist defeat of actual history through entertainment, it was the “black” people that freed the slaves, and “white” slavery didn’t even exist, let alone the modern black-on-black slave trade in Africa and the sex-trafficking of every skin-color happening right now.

Again, racism isn’t in dictionaries before the 1900’s. Why? Because before this artificial construct of racism there was only race. You see, race means family. Bloodlines, not skin color. That which was traditionally racially-motivated was in fact family-motivated. Corporations and/or governments (States) were historically created to protect the prosperity of bloodlines of families, their family (racial) inheritance, which by their very design in Nature are, as a generalization, often similar in skin-color. Race is indeed a generic term until it is purposefully, intentionally applied to some thing.

Webster defined it as it was in 1828:

RACE – noun – [Latin radix and radius having the same original. This word coincides in origin with rod, ray, radiate, etc.] 1. The lineage of a family, or continued series of descendants from a parent who is called the stock. A race is the series of descendants indefinitely. Thus all mankind are called the race of Adam; the Israelites are of the race of Abraham and Jacob. Thus we speak of a race of kings, the race of Clovis or Charlemagne; a race of nobles, etc. Hence the long race of Alban fathers come. 2. A generation; a family of descendants. A race of youthful and unhandled colts. 3. A particular breed; as a race of mules; a race of horses; a race of sheep. Of such a race no matter who is king. 4. A root; as race-ginger, ginger in the root or not pulverized. 5. A particular strength or taste of wine; a kind of tartness… (–Webster’s 1828 Dictionary Of The English Language)

RACISM/RACIST – ??? – Sorry, those terms haven’t been created by the communists yet.

—=—

Should we stop referring to the color of a “Yellow Lab” because the “Black Lab” might be offended by the Truth of the color of its fur?

Should we stop distinguishing bell peppers by their color because they all taste the same?

Racism is not specifically defined in this 1828 dictionary because in the minds of men of old there was no such thing. There was only family, cousins, genealogy, heraldry, and the fact that whole countries and cultures were set up (incorporated) and based therefore on these blood-based “family values” across the world. And they still are. America was certainly no exception to this rule, though perhaps the first family to be intentionally overcome (planned) by its own immigration policies in order to create the notion of a new global world (secular humanist) order. It is certainly not a “racist” action to attempt to protect ones own moral fabric of society created from the like-mindedness of a family (race) of men from the influence and degradation caused by the acceptance and toleration of different races (family bloodlines) that have differing or even completely opposing family values, religious notions, and moral codes. Yet to call men of moral character based on such racial (family) tradition as “racist,” that is, those that wish to preserve the very ideals of the foundation and reason behind the original forming of a political body (State), can only be labeled as exactly what it is — intolerance. Today’s modern construct of so-called “racism” is a weapon of purely political motivation, used vehemently and ironically without prejudice to foment the intolerance of Real family so as to make the “State” the father, the head of the corporation (artificial, surrogate, legal family), and especially the destruction of such traditional family (race-based) values. To destroy a society, a culture, and ultimately the law and ability of a blood-related private people to enjoy the benefits of family and Natural liberty based on moral, self-Evident Law, one only need to project the active ignorance of Eugenic race bias into the common, dumbed-down population base so that they turn against one another, so that every neighbor is thine enemy, a competitor, and a threat to some empty idol of the god of skin-color and mammon. Ultimately, the goal of the men behind these eugenic ideals is to impose a universal, legally induced (figurative/artificial) persona of corruption of blood in all men regardless of skin-color, or what the constitution calls as “attainder,” and therefore to establish a global citizenship that requires the taking away of liberty and the power to self-govern through surrender to one of many corporation nations (the voluntary taking of the mixed, legal surname over the Christian name to render a legal persona). He that cannot show his bloodline, that his blood is of God (of Nature), of a Real Family (Race) of God, and not the legal state (artificially birth-certified and registered to the district/Caesar), is therefore a slave of the State (fictional creator of legal persons). For persons have no blood, and their creator god is only man’s government. Only through legal persona (mask/status) can we all be made into the humanistic race of adam, banned from the Garden and doomed to suffer the wrath of disobeying the Law of Nature (God). The word adam in the Bible translates to mankind, by the way, or in other words all men not spiritually free of the world (artificial construct) of man’s design. Adam (mankind) is man fallen, those entrapped in the anti-God legal matrix. The story of Adam as a singular man is a personification of all men, personification being the only way to tell such a story of moral teaching. We are all acting as adam did, biting into the apple (fig) of artificial knowledge (information), the concepts, lies, and inventions of man that go against the Law and Design of Nature (God). The metaphor is beautiful and instructive when read correctly and applied to oneself.

But the race-baiting politicians and other deceitful entertainers (professional, paid liars) seek to divide so as to conquer, to oppose all moral Law, and to cause you to do the same. To do this, all that might disagree must be labeled as racist, just like Lenin intended the fallacious title to be used. And finally, when each “side” of the now equalized debt-slaves are too afraid to speak, and when our hatred of each side is the guiding principal behind policy and entertainment, then the laws of forced equality can be made firm, and we all become like a deranged triangle, where each side blames the other for the shape we are in though never actually seeing any side but ones own.

Yet all the sides of a triangle are equal, aren’t they?

The point is not to bring us together, but to force us together when such a disposition is impossible in Nature. This constant recreation of forced turmoil by folding the different cultural and often opposing laws and religious moral foundations is the total opposite of what the Bible instructs. We are supposed to leave Babylon, not force it into legal existence, and certainly not to tolerate such destruction of our moral, foundational heritage and counterbalancing, spiritual Law. We are supposed to preserve and enforce the Moral Law, not allow it to be mixed and tainted by other cultural, legal, and religious influences. But hey, such moral reactions would be labeled fallaciously as “racist” in these strange days.

—=—

“You know, to just be grossly generalistic, you could put half of Trump’s supporters into what I call the basket of deplorables. Right? [Laughter/applause]. The racist, sexist, homophobic, xenophobic, Islamophobic — you name it. And unfortunately there are people like that…”

–Hillary Clinton

—=—

Intolerance is tolerance…

Should the average “American” be tolerable to these flattering titles of opposing lifestyles, as that which absolutely defeats and opposes the moral (unwritten) standard of conduct? If so, then what use is it to have a country and law in the first place? What is a country created for but to ensure a like-minded people sharing a system of law and culture exclusive of all other lifestyles and systems be protected in that moral belief system? Should the foundation of Bible Law as common law be forgotten or ignored to make room for a completely different and opposing system of law and religion, just so the appearance of intolerance can be pretended not to exist in the minds of “American” men? And come to think of it, what country, state, or nation in the history of the world has ever not been xenophobic or consequently been destroyed by its sudden tolerance of outside political and religious influence? Wikipedia explains that xenophobia is:

“…the fear and distrust of that which is perceived to be foreign or strange.[1][2] Xenophobia can involve perceptions of an ingroup towards an outgroup and can manifest itself in suspicion of the activities of others, and a desire to eliminate their presence to secure a presumed purity and may relate to a fear of losing national, ethnic, religious, linguistic, cultural, social class or racial identity.[3]…”

—=—

Isn’t that the purpose of starting an organized structure of society? Isn’t that the purpose of creating a corporation, its bylaws, and its leaders? In other words, isn’t every country, every tribe, every “people,” and for that matter every family (race) by default steeped in xenophobia? Can a race exist without racism? In other words, can race exist without being prideful and proud of what that race (family) is specifically because it is different than all others? Can one man call another man a racist without acknowledging the fact that his idea of racism stems from being a different race than he that he calls as racist? Can we really deny the existence of race so as to not appear to be racist, when the Truth of the matter is that we cannot help or quit being of a race (family) in the first place? Do you believe that the denial of the existence of race somehow alters the fact that we are all of different races (families/bloodlines)? Do you not see the trickery here? Do you not see the social engineering being foisted upon you so that you have no power to defend yourself as part of a race (family), and therefore have no power to act morally or from the Moral Law of Nature, because you can no longer identify with your own family (race) values? Do you not see that this is all designed to steal your soul away from Nature, away from your Source?

For better or worse, all of these constructs, from countries to religions, are artificial families (corporations) that have instilled their own artificial (legally derived) family values as law from the actual family (race) that started them. Only tolerance of the intolerable, those that act purposefully against the founding family (race) values, can destroy the country. And the greatest tool to manage such a hostile takeover is the good old manipulation of Christian tolerance. Not balanced, educated tolerance with all other virtues, but the artificial kind that is enforced by legal law — the kind that has allowed countless opposing religions and legal systems to be legally protected by government as they attempt to destroy and change the entire structure of law, religion, and family (race) values that made America what it is. Good or bad, right or wrong, whatever all countries around the world have become, their strengths and weaknesses, are solely to be blamed on the race (family) that created and continues to sustain them. If the race (family) is driven out of its own creation, the country no longer exists except in empty name only.

Now riddle me this… What country in history was not built on a distrust and fear of other cultures? What country is ever not foreign to another? There simply is no such thing as a non-foriegn country. And it is a much quoted subject that the man or country of men without fear of interference is certain to fail, and will ultimately be assimilated into another in just a few short generations. In other words, a People (family) that tolerates another way of life and law must necessarily lose their own, for two opposing forces must, by their nature, repel each other. If this isn’t clear, try pushing two magnets together the wrong way. They must be forced together, and the repulsion will never actually cease, and so neither can the executive military force behind it. We must be bound by the invisible chains of legalistic law in order to merge all cultures, all systems of law and religion into one global society, one soulless, bloodless family of the fallen adamites. This is like blowing up a balloon past its elastic capacity, knowing it will explode from the pressure of being forced to accept more than it can tolerate. I guess the balloon is therefore racist against certain air? Those enforcing this artificial tolerance know exactly what the result will be, and the United Nations was set up to govern the madness and spiritually dead order out of chaos they are instilling.

I want you to really consider this statement by the former first lady (of the Royal American bloodline) for a moment. More to the point, consider its holier-than-thou source. Hillary Clinton is part of the royal family, that is, the bloodlines of European nobility and kings, just as her husband (cousin) is, and just as every president and vice-president that has ever been placed by congress into the United States corporation is. In other words, Clinton’s power is a direct result of her race, her “white-blooded” (pure) family line, which by her own choice of words makes her the most “racist” figure in that room! What are the queens and kings of Europe if not one big, unhappy family (race)? And what are all of us to them if not tolerated, deplorable goyim?

The following are all a single race (family bloodline). They are not different races, only different corporations held under the same family estate. And, like the United States, they are all organized by a constitution. Constitutions are a dime a dozen, sorry… And they’re all hereditary in their lines of succession, or in other words, it’s all in the family (race). There are no heirs if there is no race (family). You really have to be a fool to believe that the United States president is not also in actuality another family minion upon this list. Trump is as “white” as they come, because in their world, the word white means a pure-blooded royal descendent of the kings of the following kingdoms:

State
Type
Succession
Dynasty
Title
First-in-line
 Kingdom
of Belgium
Constitution
Hereditary
Saxe-
Coburg and Gotha
King
Prince Philippe of Belgium, Duke of Brabant cropped.jpg
Heir apparent: Princess Elisabeth, Duchess of Brabant (eldest child)
Denmark Kingdom
of Denmark
Constitution
Hereditary
Glücksburg
Queen
Dronning Margrethe II (crop).jpg
Heir apparent: Crown Prince Frederik(eldest child)
 Principality
of Liechtenstein
Constitution
Hereditary
Liechten-stein
Sov. Prince
Fürst Hans-Adam II. von und zu Liechtenstein.jpg
Heir apparent: Hereditary Prince Alois (eldest son)
 Grand Duchy
of Luxembourg
Constitution
Hereditary
Bourbon
Grand Duke
Henri of Luxembourg in Brazil 28Nov07.JPG
Heir apparent: Hereditary Grand Duke Guillaume (eldest child)
 Principality
of Monaco
Constitution
Hereditary
Grimaldi
Sov. Prince
Albert II Monaco (2008).jpg
Heir apparent: Hereditary Prince Jacques (only legitimate son)
 Kingdom of
the Netherlands
Constitution
Hereditary
Orange-Nassau/
Amsberg
King
Koning-willem-alexander-okt-15-s.jpg
Heir apparent: Princess Catharina-Amalia, Princess of Orange (eldest child)
 Kingdom of Norway
Constitution
Hereditary
Glücksburg
King
President Medvedev with King Harald V of Norway big225593 (crop).jpg
Heir apparent: Crown Prince Haakon (only son)
 Kingdom of Spain
Constitution
Hereditary
Bourbon
King
Felipe de Borbón en Ecuador.jpg
Heir presumptive: Princess Leonor, Princess of Asturias (elder daughter) [II]
 Kingdom of Sweden
Constitution
Hereditary
Bernadotte
King
Carl XVI Gustaf.jpg
Heir apparent: Crown Princess Victoria (eldest child)
 United Kingdom of
Great Britain and Northern Ireland
Constitution
Hereditary
Windsor
Queen
Elizabeth II greets NASA GSFC employees, May 8, 2007 edit.jpg
Heir apparent: Prince Charles, Prince of Wales (eldest son)

—=—

Yes, those subjects of royalty also have a constitution, you know, that thing you as a national citizenship as a status (property) created by congress has been tricked into worshiping even though it has nothing to do with you under that common, lower-class status of denizened personhood? But they are at least smart enough on some level not to worship that constitution as anything but what it is, a form of idolatrous worship of false gods mediated by magical, legal terms of art to give the appearance of some pretended state of independence, while keeping intact the “royal prerogative” and war powers of the king and queen (head of church and state) of the Crown Corporation and its realms of debt-slaves. Even some Canadians actually think they (as subjects) are not under the power of the queen, that the corporation of “Canada” is not part of that royal corporation sole ruled under the Crown. They at least know, if even in doubt of their own disposition, that they are subjects of a sovereign corporation headed by a false god (king/queen/prince). In America, though as a nation it clearly and openly calls itself sovereign under the law of nations and refers to we the common citizenships as its subjects and customers, we somehow have instilled in ourselves a false-sense of artificial detachment, of freedom from tyranny. We are like a single goldfish in a bowl that believes itself to be somehow sovereign from the man that feeds us and changes our piss and shit-filled water, without whom we would suffocate in our own excrement. We lie to ourselves and teach those unreasonable lies to our children without question, and as children we believe our own lies even after we grow out of most other childhood fantasies. We figure out that Santa Clause and the Easter Bunny aren’t real, but continue to fool ourselves that we are a naturally free people even as we use and claim the protection of the legal property (status in personhood) of the United States government and pay its tax (tribute to Caesar). God created men. Governments create persons. Big difference!

Perhaps you have forgotten or been brainwashed out of knowing what some of these words actually mean?

HEIR-APPARENT – noun – The man who, during the life of his ancestor, is entitled to succeed to his estate or crown. (–Webster’s 1828 Dictionary Of The English Language)

HEREDITARY – adjective –  1. That has descended from an ancestor. He is in possession of a large hereditary estate. 2. That may descend from an ancestor to an heir; descendible to an heir at law. The crown of Great Britain is hereditary. 3. That is or may be transmitted from a parent to a child; as hereditary pride; hereditary bravery; hereditary disease. (–Webster’s 1828 Dictionary Of The English Language)

PRINCE – noun – prins. [Latin princeps.] 1. In a general sense, a sovereign; the chief and independent ruler of a nation or state. Thus when we speak of the princes of Europe, we include emperors and kings. Hence, a chief in general; as a prince of the celestial host. 2. A sovereign in a certain territory; one who has the government of a particular state or territory, but holds of a superior to whom he owes certain services; as the princes of the German states. 3. The son of a king or emperor, or the issue of a royal family; as princes of the blood. In England, the eldest son of the king is created prince of Wales… (–Webster’s 1828 Dictionary Of The English Language)

—=—

If the prince (or president) is a sovereign, and you are its subject, then you are not sovereign.

Worst of all, you have either forgotten or choose to remain actively ignorant of the fact that the sovereign royalty of America is of the same bloodlines (family) as the royalty of these European rulers. You choose to casually ignore the most race-oriented regime of corporations (nations) in the world, in all of history, the royal houses that lay claim to most of the (secular) world. You pretend that elections are fair, and that just anyone, from any race/family (bloodline) can become president. And nowadays, with such horrific race-baiting being pushed in all forms of entertainment and media, you are being entrained to believe in the fallacy that only “white” skinned people are in power. In other words, in stead of realizing the truth about the completely race-orientated royal bloodlines (families) that rule every nation, we are all being tricked into blaming all problems created by those exclusive (actual racist) bloodlines (presidents, vice-presidents, congress, corporate CEO’s, etc.) on the color of skin, completely missing the actual problem that is the respect of such royal (uncorrupted) bloodlines. All blood in reality is red when it’s visible to the Truth of the open air without legal (anti-God) consideration, not white or black. We are ruled by one race (foreign family) of men (heirs) according to heraldic, genealogical heritage, and we don’t even know it’s happening. Instead, this family of absolutely corrupt “royals” confuses and obfuscates from this reality by convincing the black people that its all the white people’s fault, the brown people that its all the yellow people’s fault, and the white people that its every other color’s fault. But the Truth is that none of this has anything to do with skin-color and everything to do with the actual meaning of the word “race.” Race is not determined by skin color, but by bloodline (family). “We, the People” is not us, white or black. It is a select bloodline, a family of men enjoined and working together to suppress, control, and extort in every way imaginable the rest of the common population of Earth. And that includes all skin-colors, with no regard to race (family). In fact, the whole idea and purpose of national citizenship is to pretend destruction, that is, legal corruption (attainder) of the blood and therefore bloodline and blood-rights of all other men not in the so-called royal family. No blood, no God-given rights, for they are inherent only to free men, not subjects in false persona (national citizenships).

Perhaps you’ve never considered that there is no such thing as a “people” in Nature? There was no people of England until it was invented. There were no Americans until America was legally created. All so-called people (a legal title) are inventions of men. And so any incorporation of “people” that supposedly exists is necessarily a fraud, illegitimate, and certainly not a Creation of Nature (God). Perhaps you never thought to ask the question as a United States citizenship just who “We, the People” actually is? Perhaps you’ve never realized that a subject of the United States is therefore a subject of whomever “We, the People” happen to be? Trust me, you would know if you were one of them, that is, one of their race (bloodline), for you would be declaring such racism in order to be part of that elite (upper-class) band of race-driven rulers of the rest of us.

To be clear, this is the epitome of True racism, and is, in fact, the only Real racism that exists in the world. It’s called royalty. Nobility. Heraldry. Genealogy. Elitism. The upper-class. And only they are considered as “white” because the meaning of this word white in legalese refers to the purity of blood as it relates only to the royal, inheritable (family) bloodline and therefore the line of blood-right succession, not skin color. Again, I tell you that Barack Obama is “white” according to legal law, being a direct descendent of the Royal family (race), as are most “black” skinned actors and politicians that are of that bloodline. You think Hally Barry isn’t considered “white” ??? LOL! Every one of them is in line for the throne, down to the last and most distant legitimately blood-linked cousin. In other words, to be a member (cousin) of the “legitimate” royal family (bloodline) is to stand as an inheritor of the corporations created by them, which they call as their kingdoms. As a common citizen of any nation, no man is actually considered as a “white” man, for the very conception of citizenship to a nation requires the forfeiture and attainder of such consideration by blood-right (God-given rights) in exchange for legal (artificial) rights. The goal is to turn all men of all races not royal unto the identity of legal persons (fictions without blood).

This modern conceptualization of racism is designed to do one and only one thing — to destroy the family unit, and therefore to destroy what is known as family values. But this sinister effort is only designed for the common citizenships of nations. The royal families exist behind the scenes, hidden beyond the corporate administrative state set up to control the plebes. Even today the queen of England pretends to be honorary, ceremonial, and not in charge of the “constitutional monarchy” that is the United Kingdom and Union. The further out of sight the hidden royal hand can exist, the more powerful it becomes.

We have no idea what it means anymore when we see signs that point to “private land” or a “private road” ahead, only that we are not supposed to go there. We only know that we would be trespassing if we did. Yet we have no idea that such a sign represents a different jurisdiction, a different realm of landholding bloodline families. We only know that we are not part of that family. And we treat that invisible border across that private land the same way we treat the US border, respecting that what lies beyond is unwelcoming, foreign territory we need permission to tread upon.

The very definition of an individual estate, country, nation, or state is that it’s foreign to all others. All 50 States are foreign to the United States (the district of Washington/New Columbia). Again, in this word foreign we garner that the law is private and strict, and therefore totally intolerant of any other culture or law — intolerant, in other words, of any other People (State) except by contract (constitution/compact/treaty, etc.). This is, for all intents and purposes, the way of the world in every country, culture, and creed (belief system). They that create a State (incorporated, private/foreign People) are always, without exception, a bloodline (family) of men. The formation of a nation is by definition the formation of an ethnicity, the creation of a new artificial “race” (legal family/corporation) of men separate and foreign to what we call as the human race. Man is not human. What is human is that which belongs to men, such as the human anatomy. Humans are not creations of God, of Nature, for the word human is manmade, a scientific classification no different that equine, feline, or canine. To be human is to be the property of man, not a man. To be referred to as a human is to be considered only as an animal, or in other words and by their own definition, as that which has no soul, a thing without self-anima, a thing without (outside of) God’s Realm and Law. The human soul does not belong to a human, it belongs to a man. What is of man is a human quality, but no man is human. To be a “human being” is to act in humanism. To be a man is to be a Creation of God. Human is only ever a property (quality/trait) of man, never the actual man. A People is never a man, for to be part of a people is to be something artificial, something that is invented by and therefore belongs to man, not God. No man is a people, for the word people is a plural. To be part of a people is to no longer be a man of God. This distinction is the foundation of the difference between moral and civil law. Civil law is for people, while moral law is only for men. The moral law must always be held higher, by all men, than that of the legal, civil law of any people he may be voluntarily a part of. It is this distinction, this protective cloak of spiritual, moral Law that has been lost to God’s people. When the foundation of anything fails, the super-structure built upon it must also, self-evidently fall. This is a maxim of law.

The funny thing is that when a person (subject) of the United States is sued, we get a letter from “the People of” whatever State that court is in. We, whom aren’t the people, know without question that we aren’t the people simply because we are sued by the people. The people don’t sue the people, because the people is a single, legal corporation. There is only one people, and it obviously ain’t us. This gets confusing because the general term “people” is used to describe us, as the common people. But the People in the constitution is only referring to the incorporation of that specific “white” the race (bloodline family) as a specific, exclusive “People” (capitalized), not the common goyim.

This private, non-ethnic status of royal privilege, by definition, requires a certain “purity” of blood, in heraldic and genealogical terms of construction. No State (People) exists without this racial (family) background in the world. This is why traditionally we would expect to see Japanese looking people in Japan, Chinese looking people in China, and Scandinavian looking people in the Scandinavian countries. This is not vulgar racism as is promoted to common goyim. This is the True meaning of race. Without race (family), one has no State (private People). And without a private People (State), one has no reason to track and keep record of pure (white) blood. And this is the very opposite of national (mixed) ethnicity (national identity). For the royal families of Africa and Thailand, I assure you, have white (pure) blood despite their dark complexion according to their heraldic records. Pure blood, of course, doesn’t actually exist. It merely refers to the active recording of genealogical records in heraldry, no different than any corporation is structured to reflect a president, vice president, and all the line of succession by blood relation. To be clear, I know no man that does not seek to pass on his inheritance to his bloodline child (issue). In other words, you are equally as guilty of invoking this false, proprietary lineage as any royal. Only the scope and size of the commercial transaction of inheritance is different. In this way, we must acknowledge the fact that we are all in fact racist, which ultimately means nothing at all in Nature (Reality), only that we wish the best for our own children (family bloodline).

But you must understand the difference between your status as a national citizenship (commercial vessel) and those private, royal rulers of that persona (property). You have been tricked and continuously brainwashed into believing that your family is the nation (corporation) you were born into. And you identify your race by that nation. There is no such think as Japan or China or Mexico in Nature. These are corporations created by private families (races). Ethnicity is simply not what you believe it to be. Ethnicity can only be understood from the perspective of master and slave. If you ask a slave what slave-master’s estate he belongs to, he would tell you the family name of his master. So too does a citizenship of any nation identify his origin by the nation he was birthed (registered/taxed) into. And so, to us, it seems perfectly reasonable to identify ourselves as “Americans” or as “Englishmen” or as “African.” This is no different than saying I am an employee (agent) of “Walmart” or “Target” corporation. A nation is an artificial construct, a fake family (race), made solely of persons (fictional characters). The fact that you have been entrained to identify yourself by your ethnicity (nationally spoken language) is a cosmic joke, for the whole reason behind such identity (pretended sameness as fiction) is to taint your bloodline (family), to take you out of Nature and place you in attainder (corruption of blood) so that you can and must be governed by the governments (mind control) of nations. Yet, as I’ve written about extensively, these royal families (races) are not of the nations. They created the nations as holding companies for we, their debt-enslaved goyim. They are private (foreign) and sovereign from all nations. Most importantly, to identify yourself by ethnicity is to remove yourself from God (Nature). It is to cause you to deny God as your Source of Existence and Law, and thus cause you to worship false idols and gods (magistrates). I am not American, I am of the Universe (Jehovah). But to the royal families (race), we are all just one color, the color of corruption, which is the color of heathens. We are all the color black to them…

ETHNOLOGY – noun – [Gr. nation, and discourse.] A treatise on nations. (–Webster’s 1828 Dictionary Of The English Language)

ETHNICAL – adjective – [Latin ethnicus; Gr. from nation from the root of G. heide, heath, woods, whence heathen. See Heathen.] Heathen; pagan; pertaining to the gentiles or nations not converted to christianity; opposed to Jewish and Christian. (–Webster’s 1828 Dictionary Of The English Language)

ETHNIC – noun – A heathen; a pagan. (–Webster’s 1828 Dictionary Of The English Language)

ETHNICISM – noun – Heathenism; paganism; idolatry. (–Webster’s 1828 Dictionary Of The English Language)

HEATHEN – noun – [Gr. from heath, that is, one who lives in the country or woods, as pagan from pagus, a village.] 1. A pagan; a Gentile; one who worships idols, or is unacquainted with the true God. In the Scriptures, the word seems to comprehend all nations except the Jews or Israelites, as they were all strangers to the true religion, and all addicted to idolatry. The word may now be applied perhaps to all nations, except to Christians and Mohammedans. Heathen, without the plural termination, is used plurally or collectively, for Gentiles or heathen nations. Ask of me, and I will give thee the heathen for thine inheritance. Psalms 2:8. Heathen, however, has a plural, expressing two or more individuals. If men have reason to be heathens in Japan– The precepts and examples of the ancient heathens. 2. A rude, illiterate, barbarous person. – adjective – Gentile, pagan; as a heathen author. (–Webster’s 1828 Dictionary Of The English Language)

—=—

The reference to Christians above is not a reference to the false denominations of corporate, legalist religions set up by the state to deceive and distract you from the True meaning of God and the Bible, but is a title placed on those that cannot and will not become part of the nations of men because they choose to follow only the Law of God, not men. These are the True followers of Christ, who understand that Christ is the Law (Word) of God, not a mere idol to worship as a false god. To be called a “Christian” while at the same time be called a citizen of any nation is to be exactly the fool they want us all to be, having two flattering titles that are diametrically opposed to one another, representing two completely opposing systems of law. This is how to create chaos, and then construct a legal, secular system of order from it.

So that this concept of bloodline as race is clear, please consider that the current, hereditarily acquired “black-skinned” kings of the kingdoms of Morocco, Eswatini, and Lesotho in Africa are by their very assent to the thrown racist. They are in power because of their bloodline (race), which must be understood to be legally considered as “white” in legal (artificial) color, meaning pure-bred from their own royal race (People/family) that reigned before them. And waiting in the wings are eager, blood-related men seeking to take that throne away from their brother, sister, father, or cousin. Race is power. Racial discrimination is the center of that power, and is the very difference between common, national citizenships and the People (State) that rules over them. Without race, there would be no countries, no kingdoms.

Just what do you think Game Of Thrones is about, anyway?

(Hint: In that show, those are cousins having sex with and entering into arranged marriages with direct, pure bloodline cousins to carry on the “royal” pretended-to-be-legitimate line of succession, and killing each other in order to claim hereditary blood-right as heir-apparent to those various, interrelated thrones, as head of those corporations. It’s a fictional show about the actual fiction of pretended royal families that still rule over us corrupted, tainted-blood commoners today. It’s all part of training you to remain under the illusionary power and control of their self-proclaimed superior race, by fictionalizing and pretending such things don’t actually exist anymore, not since dragons roamed the earth. And unicorns. Corporations are ruthless… because it’s always been all in the family. Royalty is just a sophisticated mafia family, organized crime under the guise of the magic and trickery that is rebranded as the prestige of royal blood.)

Now, where does this leave the race-baiting meme of so-called “white” privilege?

Imagine if I went to Japan and entered a Japanese family’s house (a term that means family or race) and exclaimed that they have “red privilege.” Or how about I go to Iran and claim that those families of the same race have “brown privilege.” How about the “yellow privilege” of the main families in China? Yet we have been entrained to accept that the people of Denmark and America have “white privilege” despite every other imagined colored race in the world. Meanwhile, we are all being extorted and seriously screwed over in so many ways by the only actual race of “People” that are still able to claim their bloodline (family/race) as the private founding families of the States (People) united. They’ve made us equal in our enslavement with the right hand while using the left hand to focus our attention on each other instead of the Source of our collective despotism, which we have been fooled into thinking is the price of freedom. And now, by turning this non-existent concept of racism into a so-called legal “hate-crime,” we now have the veritable legal tool to cause each other harm by turning this fallacy of race (family) into a dirty word, and by punishing anyone that acknowledges it. Again, this is the only way we can be governed legally, if we do harm and injure (bring into false, legal law) each other for non-crimes that are legally (artificially) imposed on nonsensical terms like “racist” hate crimes.

How do you destroy a People, a family, that bases its society on “family values?”

You do exactly what these royal bloodlines have done to us — destroy the ability of men to claim to be part of a family. If you take away race (family) from a man, you necessarily take away his ability to practice in action any form of family (race) values. And in their place, we must be convinced to voluntarily accept and thus tolerate all that is opposed to and that is actively-at-war-with our family (race), leaving us defenseless (without the ability to bear heraldic Arms of our families) against the legal matrix simulation. War and peace have no distinction, for either way the commerce of the gods of mammon shall be done. Amen. War is a very profitable commercial transaction, with instant rewards. Peace just takes a little longer to reach such profit levels.

Since the True meanings of these words have been lost on most of us as we are entertained and entranced with lies and propaganda about how we are all racist and shameful even though we are all considered legally (artificially) equal under the law as tainted, blood-corrupted debt-slaves, regardless of skin-color, we fail to recognize the difference between a nation (commercial corporation) and a State (private, incorporated People). Many of us call ourselves as “Christians” but are “unacquainted with the True God” because corporate religion is merely empty idol worship – the worship of the form of symbols, statues, heroes, saviors, fictional personas, flattering titles, and saints without substance, without actually obeying the Law of God, that is, without ever being or becoming Christ-like as instructed. This is (we are) what they of the private, royal bloodlines (race) call as heathenism, paganism, the lower class of goyim. Those that are citizenships in any nation (corporation) can only be gentiles, for they (we) follow the legal law above and most often against that of the Law of Nature (God’s Law/Word). This is not religion, this is law. This is the way the legal system works, causing voluntary attainder (legal, fictional corruption of blood), which causes class division, as those who claim blood-right (the right to Bear family Arms) and those who have rescinded that right in order to accept replacement legal rights granted and enforced by the still lawfully recognized families (races). This is every nation. The actual pre-modern Jews, as mentioned here, had no nation, which is why they were a free people and, having no nation, were called “the international jew.” The nation of Israel, unlawful and illegitimate as it is, is not full of Jews, it is full of goyim that call themselves as “Jews” just as this supposedly Christian nation of America is full of goyim that call themselves as “Christians.” No follower of Christ (God’s Law) would take a false god or its false legal (e.g. civil) law (doctrine) above that of the Law of Nature (God). In fact, that is the very aspect that confirms one is a True follower of Christ, one that in his or her actions is Christ-like, and therefore in all ways intolerable to the legal systems and nation of men acting in legal persona (anti-God). Likewise, the Native American Indian tribes and other aboriginal free peoples were never conquered (purchased) until they agreed to become “nations” instead of free tribes. To be an Indian nation is to abandon the Indian culture and life to become just another ethnic class of lower-class goyim (heathen gentiles). The citizenships of Israel today, as well, are persons of the nation, not free men of and under God. They have fallen for the oldest trick in the book, thinking that being a member of the so-called “Jewish” nation of Israel (a legal corporation) is synonymous with being and acting like Israelite from the Bible. It is the same with the “Cristians” that believe that being a follower of Christ (God’s Law) is the same as being a member of a “Christian” nation or false, legally derived religion (corporation). A nation is the perfect example of Orwell’s meme that freedom is slavery, as all men enjoined in citizenship to any nation are its debt-slaves, free to choose their mode of employment (being used) as a commodity in a neo-feudalistic human capital management system (capitalism). The point is that every nation is run by some bloodline of men, some hereditarily conjoined club of “royal” (upper-class) rulers that remain private (foreign) from that nation in their own State (private People). In other words, we are all ruled by tolerated racism.

You can say it till you’re red in the face, but the statistics always paint a different picture…

Racism is a lie told to those not of the royal, master race,
in order to hide their own institutionalized, millennium-old heredity-based racism, by focusing all goyim on a war between cultural differences, which are falsely attributed to skin-color so as to keep us busy fighting each other instead of they that enslave us.

The truth is that every one of us are equal, that is, equally under their spell…

They look like us, but once you see these royal “families” for what they are, you realize that the lie of cultural, ethnic racism is only skin deep. Black or white, or anywhere in between, we are all trapped in the lower, vulgar class they created for us, for all of our blood has been turned black, our True Nature tainted, our souls corrupted. It is amusing to think of a white slave and a black slave arguing over who is more enslaved, using only skin-color to determine what is otherwise self-evident. For Orwell seems to have shortened one of his equative, dystopian maxims…

Equality is Slavery. Slavery is Freedom. Freedom is equality. Repeat.

If equality is slavery and slavery is freedom, then freedom is slavery.
It’s simple math.

And what is equality but forced tolerance?

And what is forced tolerance but institutionalized intolerance of any individual cultural strength and unity, a culture of cultural hate?

Still don’t get it?

This cultural neutering, the making impotent of cultural custom through equalization, is the same as allowing the common people to worship (think about) God however they see fit, but never to actually act on the moral law that scriptures teach. In other words, it is literally illegal to practice moral law.

You cannot be Christian (a follower of Christ/God’s Law) and also be under an opposing, legal system of law (false doctrine/law). A Christian, by definition, cannot tolerate anything legal (man-made law), for legal law is always, 100% opposed to (the undoing of) the Law of Nature (God). One can’t live according to truth (God) at all times and also adhere to the lies of legalism. Likewise, no culture can possibly be tolerable of the influence and immigration of another, especially when the customs and laws are different and opposed to each other.

Legal equality means we are all equally punishable under the legal law, and have no right to use, act under, or invoke the moral law (God). Freedom of religion is intolerable to a man of God, for the Law of Nature never changes. The Law of Nature (God) is not religion. Religion is part of man’s creation, not God’s.

And once you see them for what they are, you suddenly lose all tolerance and respect for them. Only the law they created to control us, to cause us to harm one another instead of loving each other — only the delusion of their artifice of esteem and legal, class-based status protects them from us… only the illusion they cast:

–=–

You want proof of our equality, that poverty and despotism is colorblind, then go to your local homeless shelter. Go to your local tent city. Go to your local food locker. See the equality oozing from the disenfranchised and start doing something to change it. Or are you too good for that lower class… kinda like they are too good for your class? Go tell those “white” people that they have “white” privilege and see what happens!

These bodies politic (incorporated “People”) were created not as legal entities but as a stock of people related by blood. Their created nations are designed to hold not their own stock, but the common live-stock of we gentiles (goyim), that is, we that are born into the heathen, idolatrous nations. Have we forgotten that the very concept of the various immigration policies of every country in the world are based on race (family) connection to that people (State)? Are we just going to ignore that the whole purpose of the war and creation of modern Israel was for the sole purpose of created a homeland for “Jews” and that this means that Palestinians (Arabs) therefore were displaced because of their “race” and ethnicity, as a bloodline not considered “Jewish” and therefore supposedly impure (not white, not pure-blooded, not uncorrupted)? Are we supposed to reconsider what it is to be “Mexican” or “English” or “Indian” because that is now a racist title, let alone not be allowed to consider that many diseases are exclusive to certain races (bloodlines)? Should all True cultures be vanquished to make room for… Ah, globalism. Now it’s starting to make sense. Global dystopia, Orwellian style. United Nations are really just united goy – one big melting pot of Godless heathens without any foundation of family values living without any natural moral compass.

What happens when, instead of being a natural (uncontrollable) occurrence and inevitably natural (God-given) order of species, the word race is used instead as a shallow excuse for illicit, bad behavior? What happens when moral men cannot defend what they have built, both physically and spiritually, to protect themselves from immoral men of either the same or a different race if they (we) are forced to tolerate everything that is intolerable and opposed to the continued survival and success of the fruit of their combined labors? What happens when one can no longer be effective in ones communication when even his words are considered as racist, sexist, or intolerable merely because they have a masculine, authoritative tone behind them? The answer to these questions is apparent in most nations today, not the least of which are the North American ones.

For the first time in history, the concept of race (bloodline and recorded familial genealogy) is being treated as an evil, as if racial differences both cultural and genetic simply don’t exist… except, that is, for the “royal” families This cultural neutering must be accompanied by national and now global tolerance, not only of cultural differences but specifically of absolutely opposing laws, until no moral (unwritten) law or notion of public decency is left. In other words, the only people left over, those that are not tolerated by this newly conditioned society of universal tolerance, are those that espouse any form of moral outrage, moral law, or other values that infringe upon the legal “human” rights of the most immoral of men. Our right to possess and exhibit a moral character in society will not be tolerated. Morality is racism. Family values are akin to xenophobia. Spirituality is a thought crime. Equality is artificially induced by legal law at birth, not by knowledge or actions. Solidarity in tolerance requires intolerance of all dissent, of all freedom of thought, and of all respect for difference. Tolerance is active ignorance of what should by all rights not be tolerated. And we are experiencing these facts in everything from music, art, and media to the corruption of medical, scientific, and intellectualist Babel that is killing and maiming us in droves every day.

Here’s Michael Moore, whose own American immigrant genealogy includes a forefather that was a white slave brought to America from a European prison, speaking in absolute lunacy about whatever he is pretending to perceive “the white guy” and “white men” to be. We are being indoctrinated by these societal-actors to hate ourselves, to become intolerable towards our own people, our own rich history, and to revision ourselves as oppressors instead of being equally oppressed as all other men, and regardless of the color of our skin. This is the ultimate example of profiteering off of race-baiting, a well-orchestrated deceit used by those in power to keep it in the family (bloodline). And perhaps most disturbing is the audience response!

—=—

The promotion of “racism” is nothing if not the induction of men into a culture of self-hatred. As a deleterious label placed on moral men defending their family honor and values, Zionist and other race-driven influencers, propagandists, and race-baiters have proven this fallacious term “racist” in whatever form it is implemented to be an invaluable and destructive weapon that, in the war of public opinion, wins by default every time. Why? Because ignorance is strength, and the public is swimming in a very large and controlled vat of induced, tolerated, active ignorance. If the messenger can be destroyed by such labels as antisemite or racist, then communism in whatever form it dresses up as wins every time. But isn’t that exactly what was portrayed by those screaming crowds of common heathens in Nineteen Eighty-four in their idolatrous worship of their glorious leader (false god)? Do you think worshiping Hillary Clinton or Donald Trump is not idolatry? Of course it is! And its exactly what is expected from we, the goyim.

How does one separate anciently engrained cultures from the races of men that have continuously practiced them, when the very conception of that culture has everything to do with race (bloodline)? The answer is that you can’t, for all cultures and systems of law and religion are unique to race, save that Law which is taught by Jesus Christ. But this law is not one of tolerance or acceptance, but one of privacy, of remaining foreign from men and cultures and nations that are exactly what we have all become, common pagans in idol worship of false gods and followers of other doctrines (i.e. man’s legal systems of law). These cultures cannot be mixed. They are by their nature unique and necessarily exclusive from all others. That which opposes a foundational culture and system of law cannot be integrated together and somehow remain uncorrupted or uninfluenced by the other. The very nature of any culture is assimilation of all others. In other words, one is expected to adapt and follow whatever culture and legal law system he or she emigrates into. But this is only true of the goyim, those that are enslaved by the false freedom (legal franchise) of citizenship to a some nation (corporation), that is, idolatry to a false (legal) god (ruler by blood inheritance). And by definition any and every culture, system of law, and religion is defined by its uniqueness, its intolerance of all others. Without these differences, this foundational, integrated opposition of all cultures to all others, there would be no reason for them to exist, just as there is no purpose for the existence of legal (manmade/written) law except to specifically stand against the moral, spiritual, unwritten Law of Nature (God) as expressed in the Bible and other scriptures (books of spiritual, moral law).

In other words, the goal of universal tolerance is to destroy all culture, all religion, all law, and all spirituality steeped in morality, so as to cause the inception of a singular, completely amoral, intolerable global society called as globalism… a new world (secularist) order. But again, because we have been made actively ignorant of this ancient Latin word secular (translated as the artificial, commercial world of men, not of God, not of Nature), we have no idea how to fight the implementation of this New World Order so often projected in science fiction dystopias like Orwell’s and Huxley’s. Because the Latin word seclorum in the phrase printed on every dollar bill is translated as “world” instead of its actual meaning of “secular,” most folks do not understand that this new world (secular) order is nothing more or less than a total destruction of all spiritual concepts, belief systems, and moral actions (self-government) by men. Because we have lost knowledge of the fact that the Bible is the foundation of common law in America and in the European countries (holders of the ultimate, true “racism” attributed to the genealogically derived royal families and their blood-lines of succession), there is no referential left to us that we may fight this global secularism with that which it is opposed to. Secularism is diametrically opposed to the Bible, or in other words, legalism (written law) is absolutely opposed to the moral, unwritten, Bible Law. In a totally secular order, no spirituality or moral thought or right will be tolerated. This secular toleration of all things anti-moral is the end game of this modern, universal tolerance we are all both passively and actively accepting, acting in, and pretending to love — loving that which we should hate, as the Bible warns we shall time and again in our participation and respect of “worldly” deprivation, leading to our ultimate self-destruction. We are tolerating our own demise. We are at this point tolerating an Orwellian nightmare without even a whimper, for to speak out against tolerance will not be tolerated by the intolerable promoters of universal, secularist tolerance.

You know what I have finally come to understand? It’s a real ballbuster. The truth is that almost every public attack, every so-called hate crime, every theft and every assault, every shooting, public education, blood-sport, assault and murder… these are all racist. Why? Because one generally does not attack and steal from one’s own family.

Acceptance of what is a known evil is surrender from what is self-evidently good.

Tolerance is intolerance.

War is peace because we peacefully tolerate war.

Freedom is slavery because we freely tolerate slavery.

Ignorance is strength because we strongly tolerate ignorance.

Through ignorance, slavery, and war (which are falsely called as knowledge, freedom, and peace) we will be destroyed through our own tolerance of intolerable things, our love of what we should hate, our acceptance of that which we should not accept, our value in that which holds no actual value, until that which we have so long tolerated destroys us through intolerance of good, moral men — just like any host allows a parasite to devour it because the parasite utterly controls the thoughts of the host. The only difference is that we are passively volunteering to be devoured.

One last thing… to those playing the “racist” game, using this term so openly and without reserve to describe all the ills that have befallen you, I want you to stop and consider something for a moment. Perhaps you are being treated exactly how you are treating other men? Perhaps you are experiencing the Law of Nature, that is, that you should expect to be treated as you treat others? Perhaps your problem is that you are just being an asshole and so are being treated like one? And perhaps somewhere along the way you’ve simply mistaken the response of people to your being an asshole with racism? Perhaps your demand for equality would be better taken if, instead of invoking how different you are based on your race by saying others are racist, you actually treated everyone with respect, the way you want to be treated?

Or maybe you’re right… Maybe it is racism that makes you an asshole in the first place.

Either way, isn’t it time to overcome what you now know to be a totally bullshit logical fallacy and start being what you want others to be toward you? Perhaps you can do something about all the bad in your life by invoking the good in yourself and the people around you that you blame for your own disposition? Because, I have to be honest here, every time I hear you claim that racism is the reason for your self-created problems, I can’t help but consider that the only racist in the room is he that claims to be a victim of it. Besides, if you are so proud of your race (family), which you should be, what possible thing can I say or do to change that genealogical bloodline connection? Answer: not a damn thing.

If you want to end what you perceive to be racism, then you will necessarily be required to start behaving in a way that doesn’t invoke culture or race. You will have to give up your cultural heritage and act exactly how those elitist bloodsuckers want you to act… like the rest of us white debt-slaves.

Moral of the story: stop being assholes to each other.

.

–Clint > richardson (realitybloger.wordpress.com)
–Wednesday, August 14st, 2019

Lethal Injection Part 2 Coming Soon


–=–

“When men differ, both sides ought to equally be heard by the
public, for when truth and error have fair play, the former is
always an overmatch for the latter.”

–Benjamin Franklin

–=–

Greetings programs…

Here is the first teaser trailer for my new audio/video book/documentary.


They know… Congress is well-aware that doctors (through prescription and medical error)
are openly shown to actually be the #1 killer of Americans.

–=–

Please note that this is a new youtube channel, created for the purposes of my new radio shows and for trailers for this audio/visual book. I doubt very much the final video will be allowed to be posted and played without being censored, and so please keep this channel handy for updates and to learn how to receive this video offline (free and not for profit), most likely on a thumb drive that you can pass out in activism.

About the project: I’m trying something new. This is not your typical movie or documentary, it is in fact a resource book designed to be listened to and watched, an 40? hour audio/visual experience not before attempted as far as I know, and therefore breaking all the rules of brainwashing and control that keeps us dumbed down through 10 minute memes and popular culture. It will make you laugh and cry, like seeing the (secular) world for the first time. This is a book that you don’t have to read because I’m reading all of their studies and information to you. It is a PHD course in medicine and pharmaceuticals, eugenics (now “genetics”) and its source in university syndicalism and their patents, chemical/biological weapons, drugs in the military, the truth about the proven effects of toxic metals as ingredients and adjuvants, and will prove without a doubt the connection of drugs and vaccines to all modern disease states, drugs impossible to acquire without a doctors prescription (iatrogenic/doctor-caused harm and death). It will expose the Truth behind a most heinous and extreme fallacious lie – that doctors in fact do not take any official oath to do no harm, and certainly not the Hypocritical oath. And it will show the history of doctors and nurses promoting every unhealthy, cancer-causing, recreational and illicit drug as a “cure-all” from cigarettes to methamphetamine, cocaine to speed, alcohol to canibus. Most importantly, this is an attempt to preserve the history of what is fallaciously labeled as the anti-vaccination movement, from its satiric beginnings against mandated vaccines with cow pus (pox) to its now almost completely censored attempts to educate and use science to help people make educated choices, and to prevent the same catastrophes caused by the mandated inoculations of the past.

In the end, my intention is not only to end any debate about the harm caused by inoculation, but to place all the pieces of the puzzle into one undeniable, inarguable master class, revealing 100’s of their own studies and publicly unspoken knowledge of the well-documented harm (side-effects) they have caused, including all the players, good and evil, that complete the puzzle once and for all. In this way, I hope to preserve all the efforts of all of us that have publicly fought this fight and suffered the consequences and censorship of blowing the proverbial whistle.

You’ll be shocked at what I’ve put together, and your suspicions will either be verified or disproven… or you will find the Truth to be much stranger than the fictions you’ve been led to believe. This project is the nuclear bomb to end this foolish world war of willful, institutionalized ignorance and outright, provable lies.

Please help me to get this new youtube channel out there by sharing it and this blog, and either copying or embedding these trailers anywhere you can find them a willing home. Remember, no permission is required to copy, quote, use, and repost my works, ever.

The working, most likely final title? Exactly what it is: Lethal Injection: A Corruption Of Blood

Thanks to all,

.

–Clint > richard-son (realitybloger.wordpress.com)
–Saturday, August 2nd, 2019 (on the artificial roman timeline)

Thank You For Your Help!


Updated 12:25am, 12/30/19

Thank you so much to those that sent donations (gifts). I almost teared up when I hesitantly opened my email tonight and saw that so many of you had responded so quickly. You’ve no idea how motivating and spiritually uplifting that was, and how good it is to know people still care out there. I reached my goal and more. That said, if this has caused anyone hardship to help me please let me know privately.

I’m leaving the original email as posted below for context and for those that wish to listen to my last radio show and know what I’m up to.

No more donations needed, so please support those in need.

Thank you.

-Clint

———————————————————————–

Greetings programs…

As you know by now, I avoid at all costs asking for money unless I am in need. Today, I am appealing to you to make a small donation at the link to the right so that I might purchase a cheap laptop computer and the industry standard program Microsoft Word.

Why am I asking now?

Firstly, for my own health. I have been lingering in my windowless basement for years now like a hermit monk, researching, writing, etc., and my health has suffered for it. If for no other reason than my sanity, I really need to be able to write and draw inspiration from that which ironically is most often the subject of my expositions — Nature, the sun, freedom from being plugged-in.

Secondly, I would like to start doing short, subject-based radio shows again, as well as having a tool to conduct interviews for my newest audio/visual-book/documentary, which I have been working on for many months, and which, as always, I am able to offer freely without charge. To get an idea about just what this upcoming project is, you can listen to my last interview with Anne Blake Tracy, someone I would very much like to interview (in Arizona) for the film, which I really need a portable computer for. You’ll understand why her contribution, her piece(s) of the puzzle is integral when you hear this:

Link–> https://archive.org/details/clintondeannajune292019

And thirdly, I am taking part of my book series and trying to write up a book proposal, to which I need M. Word. I’m serving little purpose anymore being shadow-banned, hacked, and generally snubbed by that false “movement” that would rather thrive on its own patriotic mythos and romantic lies than seek the Truth at all costs. To reach people, I will therefore try and get a literary agent and get published. All other works and films and radio will remain free and unpublished. Hopefully an agent can help break the barriers set up to keep people like me in the shadows and help me book engagements and debates, etc. Any advice, suggestions, or help to this end are appreciated.

To anyone that contributes at least $20 to my goal in the next week or two, I will (hopefully) send a free, signed copy of any future book I manage to ever get published, if that happens. I’ve nothing else to offer, really. The book will be called “Gleaming The Matrix” with a subtitle about “Simulacrum and Simulation”. It will be a re-write and comparison of The Matrix movie (a metaphor for our collective hypocrisy) with the book it largely was based on by Jean Baudrillard.

To those that have supported my works in the past, I thank you sincerely and humbly. If I haven’t thanked you before on a personal level, please know that when in the middle of a project I have only that one purpose driving my life, and that my gratitude is greater than you can imagine, as your gifts allow me to have the greatest job in the world, my own, without compromise. This means everything to me.

I would like to raise about $400 if possible, which would allow the purchase of a bare bones pc and the program needed. If or when I reach that goal, I’ll update this post to reflect my gratitude and then take the post down shortly after.

They say a mind is a terrible thing to waste. So I leave my fate in your hands…

Thank you,

.

–Clint > richard-son (realitybloger.wordpress.com)
–Monday, July 29th, 2019

The New Old – Discovering The Coverings Of Alt History


There are many memes supporting what seems to be a mass of interconnected false paradigms floating around in the minds of men today, many of which are designed to alter or outright change the perception of what we helplessly pretend and call as history. You know, his story? The story told of our own story…

From the Origin of Man to Fomenko’s Tartarian paradise to flat earth sophistry to the forever improvable religion of science known as the big bang, there is obviously a concerted effort, if not to merely hide the mythos of cultural, political, and scientific history, to utterly destroy its perspective relationship to the current state of international and religious affairs. And why not? What dictator, what royal family, and what challenger to such elitist tyranny would not want to put forward a historical timeline from which the tyrant justifies his current tyranny? Wasn’t it Orwell that so self-evidently stated he who controls the past, controls the future; and he who controls the present, controls the past?

For today, let us simply address just one of these man-made creators of mythos, the fictionality of Anatolii Fomenko.

I have made my own opinions on what is history and why it can never be trusted clear on this blog and in my book, with the exception being only the laws and opinions contained within the primary sources of the time. For example, the history of America’s pioneering of organized, legalized, state-sanctioned Eugenics can be found in the annals of Supreme Court decisions on forced sterilizations and within the records of the University system from which it was first given traction. We may also know the true nature of the past when presidents and prime ministers are finally apt to apologize for their government’s past actions; for instance the many chemical and biological weapons testing done against unwitting populations. The victims, as the intended receivers of such lame apologies done only after the statute of limitations takes effect or after those involved are already dead, are certainly primary evidence of what can be called true history.

But when it comes to the types of fallacious, mythological, patriotic, and ironically detailed stories told for the purpose of justifying the current role and intolerable actions of the modern ruling elite, we should never fool ourselves that these stories of history exist for any other reason than to foment the continued existence of the illegitimate inheritance of the fruit of those historical tales, which of course are perpetually granted to the offspring of those historical characters. The Queen in right, the presidents and prime ministers and congresses that are her direct descended bloodline of cousins, and all those who, with unwavering nepotistical allegiance, follow in the glory of that family history, where all other 99.99% of the history of common men is ignored to showcase the few powerful criminals that supposedly invented and founded the kingdoms, nations, religions, and legal systems of law that we allow them to govern us with today. After all, it is the current, corrupt bloodline of elitist men that was shat out of the inheritable rectum of their forefathers that control the present by preserving the past so as to ensure the future control of that offspring which shall equally be shat from their own rectums. After all, they certainly cannot be the rulers of men without the inculturation and indoctrination of their own historical narrative, the very lame and fragile justification presented to us all so that we are made to actually believe that their fictional, unjustifiable power structure is just the way it is. History, me thinks, is the greatest excuse for both action and inaction ever invented by men. We are controlled by the institutionalized, exaggerated lies that make up the past just as our children will be controlled by the predictably programed future presented to us by those that continue by birth-right to control the present. Worst of all, we lie to ourselves, using this false pretense of narrative, political history as our own excuse, to pretend our own moral hands are tied, justifying our passive place in the hierarchical mid to low order, pretending we are not voluntarily participating in and even loving our servitude to that upper class and their schema.

The mental state that we all currently occupy in our volutnary, collective obedience to what history apparently has birthed for us was penned and politically planned for us well before any story of America was born. For the conspired brokerage of power is not new to history, and the common man is doomed to repeat history not because he doesn’t study it, but because he passively ignores it. This ignorance manifests its ugly head in every generation, based on both the promise and the possession of the benefits of voluntary participation, voluntary servitude to that which bestows such flattering titles, artificial rights and benefits, and the artificial status of socioeconomics. Love of money. We are lost to history by voluntarily relinquishing our place in it, for the writers of history only include those tales of men whose actions are either favorable to their own continued power brokerage or whom are against it, for every hero needs a villain, even the state. Government has no purpose without the enemies it must create and continuously alienate to justify its militarized armies and police. The politics of obedience are nothing new…

—=—

“Poor, wretched, and stupid peoples, nations determined on your own misfortune and blind to your own good! You let yourselves be deprived before your own eyes of the best part of your revenues; your fields are plundered, your homes robbed, your family heirlooms taken away. You live in such a way that you cannot claim a single thing as your own; and it would seem that you consider yourselves lucky to be loaned your property, your families, and your very lives. All this havoc, this misfortune, this ruin, descends upon you not from alien foes, but from the one enemy whom you yourselves render as powerful as he is, for whom you go bravely to war, for whose greatness you do not refuse to offer your own bodies unto death. He who thus domineers over you has only two eyes, only two hands, only one body, no more than is possessed by the least man among the infinite numbers dwelling in your cities; he has indeed nothing more than the power that you confer upon him to destroy you. Where has he acquired enough eyes to spy on you, if you do not provide them yourselves? How can he have so many arms to beat you with, if he does not borrow them from you? The feet that trample down your cities, where does he get them if they are not your own? How does he have any power over you except through you? How would he dare assail you if he had no cooperation from you? What could he do to you if you yourselves did not connive with the thief who plunders you, if you were not accomplices of the murderer who kills you, if you were not traitors to yourselves? You sow your crops in order that he may ravage them, you install and furnish your homes to give him goods to pillage; you rear your daughters that he may gratify his lust; you bring up your children in order that he may confer upon them the greatest privilege he knows – to be led into his battles, to be delivered to butchery, to be made the servants of his greed and the instruments of his vengeance; you yield your bodies unto hard labor in order that he may indulge in his delights and wallow in his filthy pleasures; you weaken yourselves in order to make him the stronger and the mightier to hold you in check. From all these indignities, such as the very beasts of the field would not endure, you can deliver yourselves if you try, not by taking action, but merely by willing to be free. Resolve to serve no hands upon the tyrant to topple him over, but simply that you support him no longer; then you will behold him, like a great Colossus whose pedestal has been pulled away, fall of his own weight and break into pieces?”

“…Let us therefore admit that all those things to which he is trained and accustomed seem natural to man and that only that is truly native to him which he receives with his primitive, untrained individuality. Thus custom becomes the first reason for voluntary servitude. Men are like handsome race horses who first bite the bit and later like it, and rearing under the saddle a while soon learn to enjoy displaying their harness and prance proudly beneath their trappings. Similarly men will grow accustomed to the idea that they have always been in subjection, that their fathers lived in the same way; they will think they are obliged to suffer this evil, and will persuade themselves by example and imitation of others, finally investing those who order them around with proprietary rights, based on the idea that it has always been that way.

—“The Politics Of Obedience: A Discourse On Voluntary Servitude,” by Etienne de La Boetie

—=—

Custom is just another word for an appeal to history.

But let us get back to the subject at hand…

I am posting this entry upon my journey merely to help you, my fellow slave to history, to understand how historical revisionism is being played out before our eyes, and how easy it is to be duped by the power brokers of nations that seek to alter their own past so as to justify their future actions — despotism and tyranny in the name of history.

And so today I simply wish to point you in the right direction, that you may find both the logic and reasons behind the historical revisionism coming from the Russian empire. For a while it has been hard not to hear of the exploits of one Anatolii Fomenko and the glorious revisionism of Tartary. As if the lost kingdom of Atlantas was suddenly discovered, Tartary is being promoted as its simulated surrogate. This alternative, revisionist effort to recreate history in Russia’s own image is a very interesting case study, believed by innocents and promoted as the new truth by fools. But let us examine the purpose behind this revisioning by looking at just who in the present is attempting to control the past in order to rule in the future.

For this, I pass on to you a book entitled: History as Therapy: Alternative History and Nationalist Imaginings in Russia, by Konstantin Sheiko and Stephen Brown, published May 1, 2014. I was fortunate enough to have found a link to this on a comment board a while back, the commenter I wish to thank and apologize for not being able to source here. That said, I will simply quote from the book and leave a link to a free version as an Ebook for those interested, while asking those with the ability to support the authors by purchasing the ebook if you decide to read and utilize it. I feel this is a very important work, especially for those feeling lost in the melee of historical nonsense and trickery being promoted by so many outlets. The book is described as such:

This astonishing book explores the delusional imaginings of Russia’s past by the pseudo-scientific ‘Alternative History’ movement. Despite the chaotic collapse of two empires in the last century, Russia’s glorious imperial past continues to inspire millions. The lively movement of ‘Alternative History’, diligently re-writing Russia’s past and ‘rediscovering’ its hidden greatness, has been growing dramatically since the collapse of Communism in 1991. Virtually unknown in the West, these pseudo-historians have published best-selling books, attracted widespread media attention, and are a prominent voice in Internet discussions about Russian and world history. Alternative History claims that Russia is much older than Ancient Egypt, Greece and Rome; that the medieval Mongol Empire was in fact a Slav-Turk world empire; and that, in the twentieth century, duplicitous foreign powers stabbed Russia in the back and stole its empire. For its followers the key to Russia’s greatness in the future lies in ensuring that Russians understand the true wealth of their past. Alternative history has become a popular therapy for Russians still coming to terms with the reality of Post-Soviet life. It is one of the forces shaping a new Russian nationalism and an important factor in the geopolitics of the twenty-first century.

To purchase ebook: https://play.google.com/store/books/details?id=vY00DwAAQBAJ&rdid=book-vY00DwAAQBAJ&rdot=1&source=gbs_vpt_read&pcampaignid=books_booksearch_viewport

Partially online here: https://books.google.com/books?id=vY00DwAAQBAJ&printsec=frontcover&vq=PUTIN#v=onepage&q=PUTIN&f=false

Turning first to page 41, with regard to Fomenko, we read the following, which is the end of Chapter Two, leading into the beginning of Chapter Three:

—=—

Begin excerpt:

When Communism collapsed and the new Russian state was established in 1991, there were half-hearted attempts at galvanizing popular opinion around a new sense of what it meant to be Russian. President Yeltsin appointed and expert committee ‘to establish the true nature of Russia’, and newspapers offered prizes for ‘the best definition of Russianness’. Nonetheless, the 1990’s came and went without any clear answer from the state as to who the Russians were and what Russia stood for. Even Putin when he emerged as Yeltsin’s protege and likely successor in 1999 portrayed himself as a technocrat rather than as an ideologue.

What Putin and his administration failed to develop was some sort of over-arching narrative to inspire popular support. As Graham Gill has put it, the presidential administrations of Yeltsin and Putin failed ‘to articulate a consistent narrative embodying a vision of either Russia’s future or of how it was to be constituted …. No presidential vision has become embedded in the public lore of the society’. Instead of a widely accepted ‘national idea’ that described Russia’s new circumstances and inspired enthusiasm among ordinary people, an ideological void emerged, which was soon filled by a cacophony of competing voices that ranged from Communists to ultra-nationalists, from the Orthodox Church to neo-Pagan occultists, and from Eurasianist empire builders to national separatists. Russia’s rulers soon came to fear that they might have built their new state upon the ideological equivalent of quicksand.

It is this fear of having no firm historical foundation in place that lies behind the increasingly desperate efforts of Putin and his allies, from the mid 2000’s, to write a ‘usable history’ that explains and justifies the new post-Communist Russia. We get a sense of how important the post-Communist elites view the writing of history from the reflections of Putin himself. From Putin downwards, there is little patience with the multiplicity of views and competing interpretations that are the stock-in-trade of conventional history writing. In 2007, Putin told a gathering of schoolteachers that there was a need for a new primer in Russian History to overcome the confusion and errors contained in the dozens of school texts then in use.

The result was a text credited to Fillipov that became notorious among its liberal critics for reinventing Stalin as an effective state builder who made occasional mistakes. The logic of this text implied that the authoritarian rather than the liberal rule worked best for Russia. Leon Aron has argued that Putin and his administration’s understanding of history can be summarized in two axioms:

The first axiom appears to be this: although there were ‘mistakes’ and ‘dark spots’, what mattered was the survival and strengthening of the state–by whatever means necessary. And by that standard, the Soviet Union was a glittering success, and the costs were justified… the second axiom of modern Russian history according to Putin is that the Soviet Union was a ‘besieged fortress’, forever under the threat of attack by the West, and that the machinations of the West were responsible not only for Soviet foreign policy but also for a great deal of domestic misfortune. The overarching aim of this and all future historical narratives is the ‘normalization’ of the monstrosity of Soviet totalitarianism, the manufacture of justifications and excuses for its crimes.

As Brandenberger has put it, Fillipov’s textbook did not explicitly rehabilitate Stalin, but rather established the justification for authoritarian rule. Russia’s survival depended upon a ‘500-year political tradition which demanded that power be concentrated in the hands of a single, autocratic ruler and his centralized administrative system’. Thus, Russian unity and strength from above will better safeguard Russian national interests than grassroots political parties, social movements, or civic organizations.

In 2009, President Medvedev declared that Russia’s history had undergone a process of falsification during the 2000’s, and that in recent times the atacks from abroad had become more angry and aggressive. His answer to this problem was to establish the Presidential Commission of the Russian Federation to Counter Attempts to Falsify History to the Detriment of Russia’s Interests, which would operate from 15 May 2009 to 14 February 2012. Putin and Medvedev entrusted staunch allies from their political retinue with the task of fashioning this history. Key figures in these efforts are the Speaker of the Duma and Chairman of the Russian Historical Society, Segie Naryshkin, and the Minister of Culture and Chairman of the Russian Military-Historical Society, Vladimir Medinskii. The president of the Commission charged with protecting Russian history was Naryshkin. No doubt conscious of the accusations of Orwellian thought control that the Commission would attract, Naryshkin assured his listeners that his organization never intended to make historians speak with one voice. Instead, the Commission’s aim was to rebut the harmful propaganda that had been directed at Russia as a result of the rewriting of history in other countries.

Like Fillipov’s textbook, Naryshkin’s commission signaled the regime’s intentions but did not immediately solve the problem. Obviously dissatisfied with the results of previous attempts to end the ‘porridge in the head’, the re-elected President Putin in 2013 outlined yet another attempt to establish a new historical regime. He ordered the Ministry of Education, the Russian Academy of Sciences, and the Historical Society to collaborate in producing textbooks without ‘contradictions and ambiguities’. The textbooks are expected to emphasis patriotism, Russian Orthodoxy, civic mindedness (grazhdanstvennost), the must ethnic nature of Russia, and its mighty civilizational and martial achievements.

Happily, some of this work was already being undertaken at a popular level. Alternative history is much too radical to be embraced in full by government officials, let alone Putin. Yet, as we shall see, there is good reason for thinking that Putin and his ideologies are borrowing ideas from alternative history to pupulate their own hitherto dreary, unimaginative, and, often, absent narrative about what post-Communist Russia stands for. It is not too much to suggest that alternative history and regime propaganda are moving in the same direction, just at different speeds.

Putin’s propagandists have recently discovered what has been well described in the scholarly literature as ‘civilizational nationalism’. Russia’s imperial restoration will need ideas and enthusiasm, and not just oil and gas, thus:

The Kremlin’s canonization of the idea of a special thousand-year civilization that predetermines a ‘special path’ for Russia is gradually elevating to the rank of an official ‘one true doctrine’ to replace Marxism-Lenonism. An army of paid and unpaid propagandists are mining this vein of gold, turning a theory into a political technology (art).

This ‘army of paid and unpaid propagandists’ contains a good many regiments of alternative historians and the readers with whom they are in conversation. Precisely because of its unabashed nationalism, alternative history has foreshadowed the type of ‘political technology’ that Putin and his administration is likely to deploy in order to resolve the complicated issue of Russian identity. A radicalized ethnographies-nationalism might yet shape public opinion in unpredictable ways, enhancing the potential for a new Russian Revolution. Tamed and harnessed, however, ‘civilizational nationalism’ may provide the glue that the present administration needs to maintain its grip on power.

Chapter Three: Empire, Nation, Nationalism

‘The most effective way to destroy people is to deny and obliterate their own understanding of their history.’

–George Orwell

Part One: Russia’s Multiple Identities

To make sense of alternative history, we first need to explore in more detail Russia’s identity crisis. Fomenko entitled his major work Imperiia or Empire, a word that has much more positive connotations in Russia than it does in the West. Empire, for Fomenko and for many Russians, means the repository of political and economic power projected across a huge geographic era. This meaning is very different to Lenin’s concept of exploited and subjected colonial peoples. This positive view of the imperial past is reflected in the fact that the overwhelming majority of Russians have found it impossible to distinguish between Russia as nation-state and Russia as empire. Thus the term ‘nationalism’, in the context of Russia, is a problematic one.

The growing vitality of nationalism has been one of the most remarked upon aspects of the post-Communist history of Eastern Europe and the former Soviet Union. The context for Fomenko is the collapse in 1991 of the Soviet Union, the Communist state that more or less occupied the territory inherited from the Tsarist Empire. The Soviet Union’s principal successor state, the Russian Federation, is the world’s largest state even if it is only half the size of its Communist and Tsarist predecessors. Politically and geographically, modern Russia occupies the same space today as it did approximately three hundred years ago in the era of Peter the Great. Since the collapse of Communism, Russian intellectuals and political commentators have sought out solid ground in order to make sense of Russia’s new geography and its diminished place in the hierarchy of the world’s great powers…

As for why alternative historians have made such fantastic claims about Russia, it must be remembered that Russian alternative history is in competition with the alternative history of other national groups. The writers under consideration in this book have found themselves in a contest with their counterparts in Ukraine, Central Asia, and the Turkic peoples within the Russian Federation. Popular, as distinct from state-inspired, chauvinism was frowned upon in Tsarist and Soviet times. Only in the last two decades has nationalism become part of a public conversation about the merits of rival ethnic histories. As Shnirelman has put it:

For people who believe they have been deprived of their cultural legacy, invention of the past becomes a powerful instrument–first, for the raising of self-esteem and the re-evaluation of their position among other peoples, and second, for demanding special rights and privileges with respect to others who lack their glorious past…

Since the 1980’s, a huge literature has developed around terms such as patriotism, nations, and nationalism. Patriotism seems less problematic and can be defined as strongly positive feelings towards one’s homeland. As for the term ‘nation’, Hobsbawm distinguishes between the nation as citizenship, ‘in which the nation consists of collective sovereignty based in common political participation’, and the nation as ethnicity, ‘in which the nation comprises all those of supposedly common language, history, or broader cultural identity. Gellner came up with the most enduring definition of nationalism itself when he wrote that ‘Nationalism is primarily a political principle which holds that the political and the national unit should be congruent’. While definitions are important, assigning ethnic groups to a particular homeland has proved more challenging…

After Peter, it took another century for Russian rulers to formulate an official vision of what Russia was. Under Tsar Nicholas the First and his Minister for Education, Uvarov, the trinity of ‘Autocracy, Orthodoxy and Narodnost’ was coined. Narodnost is deliberately vague in the way it evokes a bond between the peoples of Russia and the land they occupy. It was in effect an antidote to nations within the Russian empire seeking their own states. Its aim was to bind the people of Russia together by suggesting that they were special and morally superior to the West…

End Excerpt.

–Earlier in the book, from page 14, we read:

Begin Excerpt.

In the immediate aftermath of the collapse of Communism, Russian universities were in an especially parlous economic position. In the 1990’s, history writing, like the Russian state itself, entered a state of flux. The erstwhile conformism of Soviet academia collapsed from within as some historians defended the Communist past, others became trenchant critics of the former regime, and the majority looked anxiously to see which way the political wind was blowing. Their Western counterparts were keen to investigate and publish materials relating to the more sensational aspects of the Soviet period such as the Stalinist purges. But in Russia and the West, there was only a limited market for scholarly ruminations on arcane controversies connected to Russias ancient and medieval past.

It was into this virtually empty space that alternative historians, led by the likes of the New Chronology movement of Anatolii Fomenko and Gleb Nosovskii, ventured. Fomenko (1945-) is a renouned mathematician who has belonged to the academic staff of Moscow State University since the Soviet era. He is a member of Russia’s Academy of Sciences, a professor with a doctorate in applied physics and mathematics, head of the Mechanical-Mathematical Department of Moscow State University, and author of more than one hundred and eighty scientific works. He has written dozens of well-respected monographs and textbooks in his specialist field of mathematics. Fomenko was awarded Russia’s State Award in 1996 for his scientific achievements. The qualifications of Nosovskii (1958-) include a PhD in physics and mathematics. More notoriously, they are the authors of more than one hundred publications dealing with Russian and world history. The volume of their output is astonishing and reflects both of their enthusiasm and their mass-production methods as different members of their team specialize in different periods and locations. Since the collapse of Communism, New Chronology has thrived as a publishing phenomenon, despite and partly because of the hefty criticisms directed at it from conventional scholars. It has become better known in the West too, attracting the attention of scholars who are concerned about its impact upon ordinary Russians’ understanding of history and Russia’s place in the world. The English language title of Fomenko’s magnum opus is History: Fiction or Science. Fomenko’s ambition is to replace the existing ‘fiction’ with the ‘science’ of alternative history. Fomenko and New Chronology represent a popular rebellion against the version of history preferred by Russia’s scholarly elite. Or, as one scholar has put it, New Chronology is a prime example of ‘the conjunction between conspiracy theory and the rewriting of history [that] makes up one of the main instruments for disseminating nationalist theories in today’s Russia, theories based on a kind of post-modern, paranoid cultural imaginary.

The number of critics of Fomenko and his fellow alternative historians has certainly grown in recent years, and there have been premature announcements of New Chronology’s imminent demise. Yet alternative history has shown a remarkable capacity to absorb the blows inflicted by its critics and move forward, its momentum enhanced rather than deflated. So far, alternative history has not succeeded in winning over the academic departments of major universities, nor has it replaced the existing school textbooks. The alternative strategy is not to outscore the professional historians in a debate of a particular controversy or time period. Rather, the plan is to render conventional scholarship irrelevant by winning over the book-buying public and Russia’s growing army of internet users. Their passion is expressed in their apocalyptic version of patriotism for, in the words of one alternative historian:

When a nation maintains her historical memory, she will fight not only for material values, but also for the honor of the state (derzhava)… But if this nation is forced to abandon traditional national values and substitute instead a set of alien principles, then this nation is like a giant that was defeated not by the sword, but poisoned with a substance that darkens the mind and paralyses the will.

–End Excerpt

—=—

What would a nation, an empire, be without its historical source and reason for existence? The answer to this question is always the same – the more force that is used against the common people signifies the further away from its original purpose and ideals the empire has gotten. In America, we are under military rule, martial law, via the invocation of war powers (emergency) and the subsequent soft suspension of the constitution. We are made to believe we live in independent states just as in colonial history, that we are actually part of the state we live in instead of just foreign US residents, yet we are all birthed into the nation, into Washington DC, a district wholly outside and foreign to any of the 50 individual States. The union is no longer controlled by the States, the States are controlled by the empire corporation called “United States”, seated outside of and foreign to any State. Yet the appeal to the romantic history of the original thirteen colonies-turned-States after their war and struggle for independence is all we hear about, a false narrative used to justify the exact tyranny and oppression of a federal government that the King of England possessed while using the Crown’s appeal to its own history and right to rule over the corporations (colonies) set up by it. The Russian Federation (federal government district) is, to its various member states, not at all dissimilar to what the United States federal government is to the 50 states United – an illegitimate (de facto) dictator.

In other words, every present-day nation is an appeal to history. Every revolution is an appeal to history. Every law is an appeal to history. Every elected and appointed official is an appeal to history. The political process is an appeal to history. If you ask the president of the United States what makes his flattering title and dictatorial war powers legitimate, he will say “the people”. If you ask the people the same question, they will make an appeal to history — he was voted in at some point and that’s the way it has been since before I was born. That’s how the system works. Really? I’m sure lab rats and zoo animals think the same exact thing while rotting in the cages they were born in…

—=—

“The most successful tyranny is not the one that uses force to assure uniformity
but the one that removes the awareness of other possibilities,
that makes it seem inconceivable that other ways are viable,
that removes the sense that there is an outside.”

–Allan Bloom, “The Closing of the American Mind”

—=—

Of course, every nation has its own, personalized history, a justification for its current and future existence linked inextricably to the past. Therefore, each kingdom must balance itself ever so carefully upon the lies that constitute each individually perspective history of the multiplicity of demented, endlessly providential, manifest destiny attributed to every empire. And God is always somehow on the side of every nation, a petty excuse on the Grandest of scales for inexcusable actions in both war and peace, which also means that God is at the same time against every nation too — the paradox of a false attribution to the empty idols of deity — many nations under and over their own version of God

I imagine that, at the time when the American civil war was ending, the empire of the federal United States under its illegitimate emergency war powers, which had just decimated half of its own unionized states to the south, must have had a very similar crisis of conscious about their own perceived history, and likely had the same conversations about conserving the good, reimagining the bad, and essentially reinventing United States history to justify their own federalized, standing army so demonized in the Declaration of Independence. Let’s say it was a war over slavery… yeah, that’s it, we had to free the slaves! We’ll be heroes! And the common, illiterate dupes will never know the difference… 

But the greatest takeaway from this is in the term itself: alternative history. If history were true in the first place, there could be no alternative. Truth, you see, has no alternative. It’s the truth. You cannot have two differing (alternative) truths about the same thing. And so I stress again that history is never truth, but only the empire’s foundational propaganda that seeks to justify the purpose of its modern and future (post-modern) existence.

But there’s an even darker side to history. You see, the history of nations, being the story of each nation’s purpose to exist, is always a sociopath. The history of each nation is as the Narcissus admiring its own reflection, warring against any enemy that might cause ripples in the clear historical view of itself. Revisionist history is like breaking the vanity mirror of ones false appearance, like wiping the lipstick from a pig, for every nation loves only itself while hiding behind imaginary borders, fictitious lines drawn in imaginary sand that pretendedly say do not cross.

Indeed, history is not merely a story told, it is the very identity of all false existence. History is always the past, and he that controls the past controls the future. The future is everything after history, including most parts of the more recent past. One has to wonder what could possibly keep the United States empire and union of states together if it weren’t for the viral history of Philadelphia and the continental congress. Viral history… it’s like a disease. It prevents betterment. It ensures nepotism, and subsequently, despotism. And, like any other corporation out there that had humble beginnings, where we meagerly, obsucrely came from is and always will be the greatest tool of manipulation possible.

History represents the success stories of empire, the fish story no one in their right mind and reason should believe in. For history is never truth. It simply cannot be. Nothing made by men is natural. Nothing invented by man is truth. And truth cannot be revisioned… unless, that is, you call it history.

Now imagine if suddenly, instead of existing to please the historical narrative, we acted as if the reason and purpose for our existence is to ensure the future? Imagine if we lived for a better tomorrow, instead of using yesterday to justify our God-awful actions of today? Imagine if history did not dictate the present, and that, therefore, the future was something other than ensuring the continuity of government, or in other words, insuring the new feudalism of modern empire will continue into tomorrow. Imagine what you could do to serve others, to live for the purpose of preserving Life and the Source of Life, the highest Law, instead of merely preserving the emptiness of history’s inventions, the despotism of empire.

History can only ever be the popular alternative to truth.

Here’s one for the road…

Now there’s revolution… but they don’t know what they’re fighting…

—=—

.

Clint > richard-son (Realitybloger.wordpress.com)
Thursday, July 18, 2019

Monty Python Ended The Gender Identity Debate In 1979



Scene from ‘Life Of Brian’

–=–

Couldn’t help myself… but this 2 minute clip is both an incredibly accurate foreshadowing and a complete deconstruction and utter defeat of the gender identity meme.

Either that, or they had this ridiculousness planned for ages and predictively programmed into us as such for a very, very, VERY long time.

Whatever the case, this is brilliance in the art of satire.

So funny it hurts… like the Truth often does.

New article coming very soon on race-baiting and the racism fallacy and meme, and what it’s really about…

.

–Clint > richard-son (realitybloger.wordpress.com)
–Monday, April 26th, 2019 (Roman Timeline)

 

The Plague Of Synthetic, Poisonous, Patentable “Food” Products


Please view and share the work of Camille, who researches and works diligently to provide these kinds of videos for you, and, if you are still undamaged enough to have any will left to take action, as she suggests, the hour is getting pretty damed late.

Is your food real, or is it 3D printed fakery?

Do you even know?

Do you even care?

Her channel for other vids: https://www.youtube.com/channel/UC_m1HUpNNfkb3x2cv9RrHjQ

.

–Clint > richard-son (realitybloger.wordpress.com)
Friday, April 19th, 2019