The Four Pillars Of Fiction: Part 2: The Art Of Dissimulation


In Part One of this essay, we discussed the ancient legal custom of the keeping of and recording of time. We know that time is money and money is time. We know that without time limits, bills and speeding tickets would never be paid. And we can now understand that, while the poor and middle-class commoner pays for his crimes with time, the wealthy elite pay for their organized crimes in money, which fictionally represents time. Our entire labor pool, in fact, works on the same valuation structure, where the poor are paid in money in exchange for their time and labor, which then allows them to purchase essential foodstuffs and supplies to survive and suffer further use as employees (subjects). The disparagement between what labor can accomplish and what is paid for it in money, of course, is ridiculously disproportional. For without the labor of the poor, the wealthy simply could not exist. Most importantly though, we can now comprehend a dualistic calendric time system constructed to separate the wheat and the chaff, the common majority from the elitist minority.

Before reading Part Two, it is recommended though not absolutely necessary to start from the beginning, here:

Link–> https://realitybloger.wordpress.com/2017/12/14/the-four-pillars-of-fiction-part-1-a-matter-of-time/

Though one of the pillars of fiction certainly rests upon money (a simulation of the artificial/man-made valuation of time), we will save this topic of money, or more specifically that of “mammon” for Part Three of this series. For to speak of the simulation of money as the valuation of all things Real into a nihilistically circular pattern of nothingness, we must first understand the nature of just what dissimulation accomplishes in society so that such a system is accepted as a false and seemingly indispensable paradigm. We must discuss how it destroys ethics, morals, and values by separating (dis-associating) man from Nature and Its Law(s), and why this quality of attaining through education, entertainment, false valuation, and other simulations of Reality a state of dissimulation in the public mind is an essential pillar to uphold the entirety of the fictional, legally represented model of simulation.

What is fiction can never be said to be Reality accept in appearance only — as some artful form without substance behind it. Legal fiction is, therefore, always but a simulation of Reality, which causes in men a dissimulation from what is Real (of Nature).

What’s the difference between simulation and dissimulation?

Ah… the answer to this question ultimately reveals the source of all of our problems.

Firstly, we must distinguish that the word simulation is a noun, as the name of something artificial, including lies. Dissimulation is an adjective, describing the results any simulation has upon the mind and actions of men. Dissimulation is caused and based upon some simulated version of Reality. Without simulation there is no dissimulation, just as without darkness there is no light, ect.

In Dante’s Inferno, one of the names prescribed to the devil was simply the prefix of “DIS.” The use of this word-forming agent stands always as an upsetting, unsettling alteration of its root, one that is generally adversarial or damaging to that which it is attached. Dis-ease, dis-satisfaction, dis-appear, dis-respect, dis-appoint, dis-regard, dis-turb, and dis-associate are examples of this factor.

Before we may understand what dis-simulation is, we must first examine the nature of what its root word symbolizes. So just what is a simulation in the legal fiction?

SIMULATETo assume the mere appearance of, without the reality; to assume the signs or indications of, falsely; to counterfeit; feign; imitate; pretend. To engage, usually with the co-operation or connivance of another person, in an act or series of acts, which are apparently transacted in good faith, and intended to be followed by their ordinary legal consequences, but which in reality conceal a fraudulent purpose of the party to gain thereby some advantage to which he is not entitled, or to injure, delay, or defraud others.(Black’s Law Dictionary, 4th Edition)

SIMULATIONAssumption of appearance which was feigned, false, deceptive, or counterfeit. In the civil law. Misrepresentation or concealment of the truth; as where parties pretend to perform a transaction different from that in which they really are engaged. A feigned, pretended act, one which assumes the appearance without the reality and, being entirely without effect, it is held not to have existed, and, for that reason, it may be disregarded or attacked collaterally by any interested person. In French law. Collusion; a fraudulent arrangement between two or more persons to give a false or deceptive appearance to a transaction in which they engage. (Black’s Law Dictionary, 4th Edition)

SIMULATED FACT – In the law of evidence. A fabricated fact; an APPEARANCE given to things BY HUMAN DEVICE, with a view TO DECEIVE AND MISLEAD. (Black’s Law Dictionary, 4th Edition)

ILLUSIONnoun – s as z. [Latin illusio, from illudo, to illude.] Deceptive appearance; false show, by which a person is or may be deceived, or his expectations disappointed; mockery. Ye soft illusions, dear deceits, arise! (Webster’s Dictionary of the American Language, 1828)

–=–

In other words, a simulation is a purposefully deceitful lie that is made to appear similar to what it represents. For our purposes, simulation is never a good thing. This is to say that to openly lie, to live in and by lies, is certainly and self-evidently a bad thing. For when one lies for a living, one begins to disassociate oneself from Reality, Its Nature (Source), and Its Law(s). This mental falling away is known as dissimulation.

—=—

What is like is not the same; for nothing similar is the same.

—A Latin maxim of law: Talis non est eadem; nam nullum simile est idem. 4 Coke, 18. (Black’s Law Dictionary, 4th Edition)

—=—

In law, simulation is never sameness. It is always false and thus always untrue compared to its origin, its model. There is no exception to this rule, just as nothing of the cartoon realm may be manifested in Reality, in the Realm of Nature. Art should never be confused to be the Real thing. This should be a self-evident Truth to the reader. But Truth is very often hidden behind that which is simulated as if it were Truth (e.g. the entirety of legal law). And so we may continue with the understanding that though a simulation is never True, a simulation can cause one to dissimulate from the Truth that is simulated in its place. What is made to appear to be the same, in other words, is most often a purposeful deceit. Simulation is always a lie, despite the matter the reason behind it.

A simulation is generally created as a purposeful venture — an intentional false-hood. The dissimulation it causes, however, is often quite mysterious, as the victim of simulation often doesn’t realize his or her state of dissimulation. This notion is quite apparent in just the fact that most people have no idea that their persona (legal status) as a completely fictional, commercial vessel in society and law (jurisdiction) is completely separate from their actual (True) Self. In other words, it is when the agent (employee) begins to believe that he or she is in every way the very flattering title ascribed by some authority figure (principal/employer) that dissimulation has grabbed hold of the mind.

If I simulate a police officer, and I therefore blur the lines between the job and the lifestyle and benefits it portends, I may be inclined to abuse said authority. If I believe I am that fictional character in agency under the authority and licensure of some higher principal (authority), and that title allows me certain pretended and violent powers over others, then I will begin to develop and use those powers as if they are Real. I will begin to treat others in the common arena (without a badge or license) that I perceive to have less authority as myself without regard to any moral law. I will do this because I believe that my actions are not my own, but that of a fictional character assigned to me, so that my actions are the actions of my employer, not myself. I take no self-responsibility for my actions, as my employer/principal has granted me its supposedly higher authority to act in its name and under its insurances (liability). I no longer feel liable for my actions. At this point, I am now fully dissimulated into the fiction, believing that the simulation of this fictional character assigned to me from some higher authority is actually Reality, which through that agency relationship causes me to express the personality and artificial essence of that simulated character instead of self-governing myself under the Law of Nature.

When the artificial (legal) hood becomes indistinguishable from the Reality that there is no actual hood, the belief in that false-hood (simulation) as Truth causes dissimulation.

FALSEHOOD – A statement or assertion known to be untrue, and intended to deceive. A WILLFUL act or declaration contrary to the truth. The term is perhaps generally used in the second sense here given. It is committed either by the WILLFUL act of the party, OR BY DISSIMULATION, or by words. Crabbe thus distinguishes between falsehood and untruth: “The latter (untruth) is an untrue saying, and may be unintentional, in which case it reflects no disgrace on the agent. A falsehood and a lie are intentional false sayings, differing only in degree of the guilt of the offender; falsehood being not always for the express purpose of deceiving, but a lie always for the worst of purposes. Deceit; Fraud; Misrepresentation. A fabrication. Scotch Law. A fraudulent imitation or suppression of truth, to the prejudice of another. “Something used and published falsely.” An old Scottish nomen juris. “Falsehood is undoubtedly a nominate crime, so much so that Sir George Mackenzie and our older lawyers used no other term for the falsification of writs, and the name ‘forgery‘ has been of modern introduction.” “If there is any distinction to be made between ‘forgery’ and ‘falsehood,’ I would consider the latter (falsehood) to be more comprehensive than the former.” (Black’s Law Dictionary, 4th Edition)

–=–

So what then is dis-simulation?

What happens when the simulation, the false-hood, the deceitful appearance as false show takes over the rationality of the host? What happens when we begin to identify personally (in a person-hood) with such a false appearance with fictionally prescribed authority?

We enter into The (legal) Matrix.

Generally speaking, we become either the victim or the perpetrator of every crime against Nature (God) and each other imaginable. We become the adversary (DIS) of ourselves. For both the victim and the villain suffer from dissimulation, simply because the delusion of power in the agent can only exist as a direct reflection of the illusion of authority by some third party. Respect of the illusion of power by the victim of it feeds the delusion of power carried by the victims antagonist. In either disposition, we have plugged into the delusional, legal fiction of flattering titles. We become the agents of our own enslavement.

From my legally anonymous work (book):

But how can one best define what “agency” is when most of us have no inkling we are even a participant in this agentic relationship with the United States or other district, never being fully informed that we stand as publicly registered agents for service of process for the person (status) in the citizen-ship we are assigned at the nativity event of our fictional delivery and birth as a legal entity?

In the 1960s, Dr. Stanley Milgram conducted experiments where he controversially uncovered this “agentic” personality and how most people are susceptible to it. His experiment posed one stranger as the dominant “teacher” against another stranger given the title of a subordinate “learner,” whereas the learner would be shocked with increasingly more painful shocks through switches controlled by the teacher delivered with each wrong answer. The experiment was designed to show how far the random cross-section of common people would induce electric shocks upon a strapped in subject when they suspected the non-consent, injury, or even death of the flatteringly titled “learner” in the next room. A majority of the “teachers” would indeed knowingly deliver these shocks when told to do so by a “doctor” in a lab coat uniform, signifying a false but persuasive symbolical figure of authority. Some would only continue if the doctor took full responsibility for damage or death to the person called the “learner.” This was historically the most ambitious and frightening scientific test on personhood and agency, as to the uncovering of what men will do when given flattering titles of authority even as simple as “teacher,” and are then mentally made subjects of yet another seemingly higher authority. But the actions of these test subjects in a middle state of authoritative power through agency were completely voluntary, being fully informed and able to voluntarily quit the experiment whenever they felt the need or moral compunction, and they were even paid before the test began with this foreknowledge of the ability to quit and keep that pre-paid payment.

In the end, it was only ever the “teacher” that was the subject of the experiment, and the results were shocking to the science community. Milgram summarized his experiments within a 1974 article in Harper’s Magazine entitled “The Perils of Obedience,” where he stated:

—=—

“The legal and philosophic aspects of obedience are of enormous importance, but they say very little about how most people behave in concrete situations. I set up a simple experiment at Yale University to test how much pain an ordinary citizen would inflict on another person simply because he was ordered to by an experimental scientist. Stark authority was pitted against the subjects’ [participants’] strongest moral imperatives against hurting others, and, with the subjects’ [participants’] ears ringing with the screams of the victims, authority won more often than not. The extreme willingness of adults to go to almost any lengths on the command of an authority constitutes the chief finding of the study and the fact most urgently demanding explanation. Ordinary people, simply doing their jobs, and without any particular hostility on their part, can become AGENTS in a terrible destructive process. Moreover, even when the destructive effects of their work become patently clear, and they are asked to carry out actions incompatible with fundamental standards of morality, relatively few people have the resources needed to resist authority.

—Stanley Milgram (1974), from: ‘The Perils of Obedience’ in Harper’s Magazine. Abridged and adapted from Milgram’s ‘Obedience to Authority.’

—=—

(Now you can understand why anyone in The Matrix was a potential agent.)

In other words, common people lack self-governance under a voluntary, unenforceable, moral Law. Most men acting in the agency of another, as a legal person in flattering title, has no True Religion, for a person (puppet) is not a Living man and has no spirit or control of its own. The puppet controls the man standing in surety to the puppet. The man follows the law of persons, under the law of agency. And whole militaries (of otherwise innocent men) can be made to murder each other under this incredible phenomenon of agency.

Milgram elaborated two theories that were summarized in the publication American Psychologist:

—=—

“The first is the theory of conformism, based on Solomon Asch conformity experiments, describing the fundamental relationship between the group of reference and the individual person. A subject who has neither ability nor expertise to make decisions, especially in a crisis, will leave decision making to the group and its hierarchy. The group is the person’s behavioral model.”

“The second is the agentic state theory, wherein, per Milgram, ‘the essence of obedience consists in the fact that a person comes to view themselves as the instrument for carrying out another person’s wishes, and they therefore no longer see themselves as responsible for their actions. Once this critical shift of viewpoint has occurred in the person, all of the essential features of obedience follow.’”

“A cognitive reinterpretation of Stanley Milgram’s observations on obedience to authority,” American Psychologist 45: 1384–1385. 1990.

—=—

Once this “agentic” personality is established (i.e. dissimulation), it is obviously very hard to break the ingrained pattern of personality and practice it creates. Thus the branding of citizenship and public-minded-ness upon all children in each nation is part of the economy and society, from the school system to enter-tain-ment. We literally grow up believing we are the fictional persona assigned to us at birth; the name, the number, and the titles (or lack thereof). But in Reality, we are (acting as) commercial agents for a principal “dummy” corporation, our residential address actually a place of domestic (family) business. Responsibility is replaced by insurance. Moral virtue is replaced by strict law. And Reality is hidden behind several forms of artificial matrixes and systems designed to create a sense of false security. The strawman as a dis-ease is the avatar, the projected self image we play as actors in the fictional persona of that legal matrix, a silent weapon for a quiet war over our minds.

If in your mind it is difficult to comprehend this separate, fictional persona (legal mask) and the fact that you are acting in agency within it, just think of it this way… if you can believe in the foolish personification of God by the church into a personage and likeness of man, why can’t you imagine the same personification of man into a fictional character or citizen-ship of the state? If you are emotionally effected by watching cartoon characters on the magic screen, then what makes you think you are not equally effected by the psychological imaginations and devices of the fictional legal personas of other men and by your own actions in that false persona and agentic title?

—=—

“I feel I owe you an apology. We have a rule: we never free a mind once it’s reached a certain age. It’s dangerous; the mind has trouble letting go As long as The Matrix exists, the human race will never be free.”

—Line as read by Morpheus (the god of sleep), from the movie: ‘The Matrix’

—=—

The creators of this legal fiction matrix code control our lives via (our) suretyship to its registered property. We are made to believe the character in persona we play is Real, just as the reflection in the mirror may fool our sense of True Being; True Life. Through this property (personhood) we are caused to be plugged in to its legal, commercial framework, that matrix of word-magic and illusion, and so as if the chains were actually Real, we believe ourselves to be bound by the laws of another’s property (fiction). We cannot seem to escape our own delusion.

The dangerous pride of this glad acceptance of such artificial titles, personality, property, and character is of course spoken of in the Bible, where it admonishes the proudness of men in their receivership of false and unnatural things and pretended authorities over other men through such artificial means, which in Reality amounts merely to an abandonment of the only True Equity and duty under the Law of God’s Creation (Nature). We abandon our True Selves and pretend with false pride to be what we are not, what does not actually Exist (in Nature)…

–End Excerpt, from STRAWMAN: The Real Story Of Your Artificial Person

STRAWMANSTORY_Square_Actual_Book_v2_72dpi_RGB
Download it free, here: http://www.strawmanstory.info

—=—

To show the extreme parallel put forward as a purposeful metaphor of The Matrix story to the legal system and code, we only need replace the science fiction element with legal fiction and its imaginary, proprietary language. For the legal matrix code as well makes all common men equal, while the machine-like elites control us through the artificial wombs they invent and provide under legal contract.

You see, the birth certificate is your very own artificial womb. It represents the simulated birth of a legal entity, designed to cause you to dissimulate from Reality, from Nature and Its Law.

Eventually, the reader will understand that the movie is not fiction at all, but a metaphoric story of the legally controlled masses of public citizen-ships (commercial vessels in persona) of all the soon-to-be-united-as-one nations.

MATRIXnoun – [Latin matrix from mater, mother.] 1. The womb; the cavity in which the fetus of an animal is formed and nourished till its birth. 2. A mold; the cavity in which any thing is formed, and which gives it shape; as the matrix of a type. 3. The place where any thing is formed or produced; as the matrix of metals; gang. 4. In dyeing, the five simple colors, black, white, blue, red and yellow, of which all the rest are composed. (Webster’s Dictionary of the American Language, 1828)

MATRIX Womb. A place where anything is generated or formed. (Samuel Johnson’s Dictionary, 1755)

MATRIXIn civil law, the protocol or first draft of a legal instrument, from which all copies must be taken. (Black’s Law Dictionary, 4th Edition)

ARTIFICERnoun – [Latin artifex, from ars, and facio.] 1. An artist; a mechanic or manufacturer; one whose occupation requires skill or knowledge of a particular kind; as a silversmith, or sadler. 2. One who makes or contrives; an inventor; as an artificer of fraud or lies. 3. A cunning, or artful fellow. [not used.] (Webster’s Dictionary of the American Language, 1828)

—=—

The birth certificate is a matrix in the legal sense of the word, which is the protocol or first draft of a legal instrument, from which all copies must be taken. Now you know why you need it to obtain a driver’s license and other legal documents, as proof of birth (existence) of the legal entity (strawman) you are claiming to be an agent for. Whatever you do in civil (legal/fictional/commercial) life will be, of course, obtained through that matrix. This legal simulation of your vital statistics at birth is what becomes your agentic, artificial identity. And what’s planned for the future of the A.I. is much, much worse…

–=–

“Genecoin: DNA for the Blockchain… So, why would anyone want to encode their DNA on the Blockchain? Like much in the crypto space, some projects are a solution in search of a problem. However, one easy reason to use the blockchain to store DNA would be as a replacement for a traditional ‘Birth Certificate.’ Notarization has long been a function provided by the Bitcoin Blockchain, so to ‘notarize’ the existence of a person’s DNA could attest to the existence of an identity, and its age. This attestation would thereafter function in much the same way as does our current oracle-based (hospital-centric) system. Additionally, for those thinking of the far off future, another fanciful notion might be to encode one’s DNA for the purposes of cloning by a future generation

—Bitcoin Magazine Online, from an article entitled, “Genecoin: DNA for the Blockchain”

–=–

Whereas today we may discard by discharge this legal identity, in the future it will be part of your genetic make-up. In other words, the dissimulation of legal identity will be a permanent part of your body, an unremovable, non-payable contractual performance debt that is property of government — the ultimate mark.

We are all programmed from childhood to dissimulate ourselves into this false, legal identity, as if we are taking responsibility for a cartoon version of us, while pretending that damage done in the cartoon world (legal fiction/commerce) is the same thing as damage done to what is Real (of Nature). Sticks and stones may certainly break your bones, but legal words are now capable of damages far beyond the temporary pain and bruising of those Real things.

This brainwashing and redirection from our Natural course is expounded upon perfectly here by Alexis de Tocqueville:

—=—

“After having thus successively taken each member of the community in its powerful grasp and fashioned him at will, the supreme power then extends its arm over the whole community. It covers the surface of society with a network of small, complicated rules, minute and uniform, through which the most original minds and the most energetic characters cannot penetrate, to rise above the crowd. The will of man is not shattered, but softened, bent, and guided; men seldom forced by it to act, but they are constantly restrained from acting. Such a power does not destroy, but it prevents existence; it does not tyrannize, but it compresses, enervates, extinguishes, and stupefies a people, till each nation is reduced to nothing better than a flock of timid and industrious animals, of which the government is the shepherd.

“But one also finds in the human heart A DEPRAVED TASTE FOR EQUALITY, which impels the weak to want to bring the strong down to their level, and which REDUCES MEN TO PREFERRING EQUALITY IN SERVITUDE TO INEQUALITY IN FREEDOM.

“Furthermore, when citizens are all almost equal, it becomes difficult for them to defend their independence against the aggressions of power. As none of them is strong enough to fight alone with advantage, the only guarantee of liberty is for everyone to combine forces. But such a combination is not always in evidence.”

The majority’s moral power makes individuals internally ashamed to contradict it,  which in effect silences them, and this silencing culminates in a cessation of thinking.

—Alexis de Tocqueville (1805–1859), separate quotes

—=—

Not ironically, trying to tell people they are trapped inside a legal matrix code is not at all different than trying to tell people they are trapped inside an artificial womb and connected to a computerized simulation of Reality. Both suffer equally from dissimulation. For dissimulation is of course the purpose of creating such matrixes.

Again, I can only compare the process of attempting to wake other men up from their legalistically caused dissimulation to that epic fight scene in the epic movie (documentary?) They Live. Just put on the damn sunglasses man!

–=–


In the end, after so much cognitive dissonance, after a lifetime of existing
falsely in the simulation, he finally sees them for what they are…
This is inception. This is the moment we (painfully)
release
ourselves from dissimulative reasoning.
Perhaps then we may stop fighting each other
and destroy the source of the simulation?

–=–

Equality is not promoted in the Bible, in the Law of Nature. There is no such thing. Equality can only be achieved through legal, artificial means. Equality is purely a fictional construct of man, fruit from that tree of knowledge. Equality is not designed to free men but to enslave them. Only slaves and subjects are equal. And yet the king (sovereign) has no equal.

In short, tyranny requires equality. For simulated (legal) equality creates dissimulation.

See my previous essay on this subject here:

Link–> https://realitybloger.wordpress.com/2013/02/19/tyranny-requires-equality/

And for the history of how the notion of equity has been confused and interposed with modern political equality, I recommend this lecture:

–=–


“The language of equality is dead (spiritual death = civil life)…”
“The language of (personal) equity is alive (spiritual life)…”
“The first equality is equity.”

–=–

Equality without consideration of equity is but a dissimulation away from the foundations and intent of any moral law.

Maxim of Law: “He who seeks equity must do equity.

What is True equity in law?

EQUITABLE – That which is in conformity to the natural law.” (–Bouvier’s Dictionary of Law, 1856)

–=–

One should never confuse or intermix the notion of the Law of Nature and legal law, which are always opposed to each other. Therefore, as stated in this lecture, the idea of legal equity is merely the empty form of Natural equitableness. That is to say that a court of equity can only consider legal things within legal places and legal status (persona), not Reality, for the law of man (form) has no connection to anything in Nature (substance), only the concept of a property (descriptive words) thereof. A man must act equitably towards all others regardless of status or lack thereof in substance (in Nature) if he expects the law to enforce equitable behavior from others. Political equality defeats every man that acts without equitableness — without (outside of) the Highest Law of God (Nature).

Equality is but a legal concept, represented in law as a legal simulation, which in and of itself is merely a fictional rationalization (of man’s law) that can only be described as a dissimulation from Nature and Its Law(s). And as Alexis de Tocqueville declared above, the nature of this legal (fictional) state reduces men to preferring equality in servitude to inequality in freedom. Only the self-governing man observing at all times substantial equitableness to all of man and Nature can be free of these destructive simulations of man’s law. For to be conditioned through the eyes of legalistic (political) equality causes men necessarily to act without consideration of equitableness, for “a government can only enforce strict laws.” This is to say that while the law of equality is a creation and therefore a property of man, equity stems from the unwritten (inherent) Law of Nature, and therefore is inherent only in men regenerate of mind and thus liberated from man’s law. Equitableness, in other words, can only be expressed despite strict (legal) law.

Unfortunately, the direct result of equality is the devolution into democracy. Again, in this modern system of political equality we suffer from, we can see a mass dissimulation away from each of our own individuality, from the True Self where equity resides, in order to instill the presidents of this mob rule sense of democracy.

—=—

Democracy is the road to socialism.

—Karl Marx

—=—

Democracy is indispensable to socialism.

Socialism is merely state-capitalist monopoly which is made to serve the interests of the whole people…”

—Vladimir Ilyich Lenin, (seperate quotes), the second excerpted from the pamphlet ‘The Impending Catastrophe and How to Combat it, September 1917’ as Lenin’s Collected Works, Progress Publishers, 1977, Moscow, Volume 25, from Lenin Internet Archive. 

—=—

Dictatorship naturally arises out of democracy, and the most aggravated form of tyranny and slavery out of the most extreme liberty.”

—Plato

—=—

“Remember, democracy never lasts long. It soon wastes, exhausts, and murders itself. There never was a democracy yet that did not commit suicide.

—John Adams

—=—

A pure democracy is generally a very bad government. It is often the most tyrannical government on earth; for a multitude is often rash, and will not hear reason.

—Noah Webster

—=—

The oppressed are allowed once every few years to decide which particular representatives of the oppressing class are to represent and repress them in parliament.”

—Vladimir Ilyich Lenin

—=—

“The best argument against democracy is a five-minute conversation with the average voter.”

—Winston Churchill

—=—

The President will lead in the treasonYour militia will leave you and fight against you… When evil men take office the whole gang will be in collusion. They will keep the people in utter ignorance and steal their liberty by ambuscade (by surprise, by lying in wait). When Government removes your armaments, you will have no power, but government will have all power.” 

—Patrick Henry (emphasis added)

—=—

The ignorance of one voter in a democracy impairs the security of all.

—John F. Kennedy

—=—

From the Gesenius’ Hebrew-Chaldee Lexicon, under Strong’s Concordance #H571, we may understand that the only Truth, the only Reality is Nature Itself. Nature needs no simulation or false appearance to Exist. It needs no words, no names, no titles, and certainly no approval by men. It neutrally defends Itself without somehow anthropomorphically believing It has some pretended set of positive law “rights” to do so. But so that we may know the more accurate definition of “just what is Truth” from the Bible, we must attempt to define it according to its authors Original (Natural) intent while also showing its adversarial, false appearance. Herein a deeper understanding of dissimulation becomes apparent.

The lexicon for Strong’s H571 (truth) states in part:

Sincerity, opposed to dissimulation. Truth, opposed to falsehood

–=–

Here we find the key to understanding the difference between simulation and dissimulation, for we may only Truly know anything by comparing its opposite:

Truth is opposed to simulation (falsehood), though it resembles (appears as) Truth. Therefore everything that is legally (artificially) considered is by the Law of Nature a falsehood.

Sincerity is opposed to dissimulation, which dissembles (changes or lacks the appearance of) anything from Its Truth.

A simulation is a game, while dissimulation is a lifestyle.

A simulation is an outright lie, while dissimulation is a mental delusion.

A dissimulation is an adversarial simulation. While simulation in and of itself is a lie, as a purposeful departure from even the appearance and false show of what is Truth, dissimulation is the simulation of a complete lie. When simulation is based on what is already a lie, then what results is a simulacra, a copy without an original (a simulation of a simulation/lie, as a copy of a copy). Thus the lie becomes the only truth imaginable to the dissimulated man, for the lie appears to be the Truth of what is being simulated.

Simulation is indeed a deception, but dissimulation is much worse. For dissimulation is a self-deception.

–=–

“Make no mistake about it – enlightenment is a destructive process. It has nothing to do with becoming better or being happier. Enlightenment is the crumbling away of untruth. It’s seeing through the facade of pretense. It’s the complete eradication of everything we imagined to be true.

Adyashanti

–=–

To be yourself in a world that is constantly trying to make you something else is the greatest accomplishment.”

Every particular in nature, a leaf, a drop, a crystal, a moment of time is related to the whole, and partakes of the perfection of the whole.

—Ralph Waldo Emerson (separate quotes)

–=–

A simulation is a false appearance, but to dissimulate from oneself is to hide ones Real Self behind that false show (simulation) — a lie within a lie. The difference is a staggeringly important one. It enters into the realm of the simulacrum.

The Stanford University Press explains in part this term simulacrum:

–=–

Phantom Communities reconsiders the status of the simulacrumsometimes defined as a copy of a copy, but more rigorously defined as a copy that subverts the legitimacy and authority of its model—in light of recent debates in literature, art, philosophy, and cultural studies.”

—A critique for ‘Phantom Communities: The Simulacrum and the Limits of Postmodernism’ by Prof. Scott Durham

–=–

The Matrix simulation in that movie was the 6th version of a computer-generated version of a society long dead. It was a copy of a copy, also said to be a copy without an original. The model was one of control, not conformity to Reality. Likewise, the legal matrix code is designed in exactly the same way, as a device to remove one from any semblance of the Reality and Law(s) of Nature and to keep one trapped inside the copy, viewing the Real world through the dissimulation of an artificial womb built merely of symbols and signs, and based on induced, delusional belief in the veracity of the illusionary un-Real, simulated as if it were the only Reality.

Are we being sincere in our citizen-ship, in legal person-hood? Or are we acting as patient victims under that civil dis-course without responsibility to ourselves and to Nature?

Our problem is not simulation itself, but the fact that we represent a simulated version of ourselves. Representation as a concept relays the idea that the sign, symbol, or token (personification) and the Real thing are essentially equivalent (i.e. sameness) — that the form represented is for all intents and purposes equal to the actual substance of the Real. Thus the concept of “representing myself” is a redundant action at best, and downright stupid at worst. What is Truth, what is of Reality needs no re-presentation, for what is Truth needs no sign or token to be understood, for it cannot by its very Nature be misunderstood. Only its name (simulation) may be dissimulated as property (form), not the Real (self-evident) thing in and of itself (substance).

But what happens when instead we choose to re-present something that is by its nature already a simulation (a lie)? If the root of the idea of representation is that the token, symbol, name, or sign (form) and the Real substance are equivalent, then the only thing we can represent in the legal realm is that which is a lie. Man cannot stand legally without some fictional representation of his True Nature and Self any more than he can enter into the cartoon realm to commune and interact with the cartoons therein. For a simulation is always a lie, no matter how closely the form of that simulation resembles its substantive model in the Real.

In other words, when we go into court representing a legal entity, we are appearing as a lie (simulated fact). We are representing that we accept as legitimate the lie (sin) and that we are responsible and in surety for its legal actions. We are representing (personifying) a simulation (a lie). We are therefore presenting ourselves as if we actually are a creature of the simulacrum, a copy without an original. We have thus entered into the darkness of fiction as a dissimulation of ourselves. We have just plugged into the legal version of The Matrix.

It is interesting to note that the term “dissimulation” seems to apply in a dramatic way to our default status of public personhood within these nations of goyim, remembering that DIS is attributed to be one of the many names of satan (that which is adversarial to Nature/Reality).

DISSIMULATIONnoun – [Latin, to make like; like.] The act of dissembling; a hiding under a false appearance; a feigning; false pretension; hypocrisy. Dissimulation may be simply concealment of the opinions, sentiments or purpose; but it includes also the assuming of a false or counterfeit appearance which conceals the real opinions or purpose. Dissimulation among statesmen is sometimes regarded as a necessary vice, or as no vice at all. Let love be without dissimulation. Romans 12:9. (Webster’s Dictionary of the American Language, 1828)

–=–

Inverse to dissimulation, we find probity:

PROBITYnoun – [Latin probitas, from probo, to prove.] Primarily, tried virtue or integrity, or approved actions; but in general, strict honesty; sincerity; veracity; integrity in principle, or strict conformity of actions to the laws of justice. Probity of mind or principle is best evinced by probity of conduct in social dealings, particularly in adhering to strict integrity in the observance and performance of rights called imperfect, which public laws do not reach and cannot enforce. (Webster’s Dictionary of the American Language, 1828)

–=–

If it is not now plainly obvious, these two terms and their dueling meanings describe polar opposites.

Dissimulation defines a citizen-ship in persona (mask) governed by the state (legal law).

Probity defines a self-governing man under God’s Law, the Law of Nature.

Personhood is bound by strict law of men, having only a legal capacity to act in commerce and society as property of the state, while self-governing men must observe and perform the Highest Law at all times, lest they fall back into that legal matrix.

Of course, dissimulation (person-hood) is absolutely integral pillar for this fictional realm of legalism to exist in its own little world. Just as a cartoon character is a simulation disassociated from the Real World, so too must men be made to disassociate even themselves from what is Real (Truth) so as to be trapped within this legal construct. The law of legal fiction applies only to fictional persons (legally pretended characters), places (jurisdictions), and things (property). None of these are Real…

Dissimulation can also be called as agency.

The major difference between an attorney (assigned agent) and a public citzien-ship (acting agent) is dissimulation. While the attorney is consensually hired in agency, as a temporary agent employed to fulfill and perform certain legal duties in a limited legal contract, the public citizen-ship lives his whole civil life in an agency relationship. The citizen-ship never ceases to be an agent. In his mind he becomes the citizen, unable to distinguish between himself and the fictional character (person-hood) he plays in the legal, commercial realm. Nature and fiction are blurred and thus intermixed in all his dealings. The simulation and the Real are thus indistinguishable. The Truth is blended with the lie, causing the phenomenon of dissimulation. We believe we are legal persons.

We believe we are the mask (persona) instead of the man behind it.

The problem is that the mask (persona) is property (a legal status) of its creator. The mask belongs to government. Government is the lawmaker (god) over its own property. And while no government law (legal fiction) effects any man, its legal law does apply to its property — the legal person-hood (legal mask) worn/carried by the man. Like a puppet, the man is unconsciously drawn around by legal strings he cannot see and thus by laws he needs not morally agree with. For without this fictional connection to the Real man through a simulated character in the legal matrix, without a persona, the man would by necessity either need to be self-governing or be militarily enslaved. Thus, this legal matrix of nations is a sort of middle ground between the two, allowing individual men to choose the method of their enfranchisement in a severely limited way, causally choosing their own use in agency, just like in that computer simulation from The Matrix movies. But then, in that simulation of The Matrix, we find an almost 100% saturation rate of dissimulation — of people believing they are Free in Nature under God while in Reality stuck in an artificial womb they can never break free from.

Silent weapons For Quiet Wars are described in the introduction as “social engineering or the automation of society, i.e. the engineering of a social automation system (silent weapons) on a national or worldwide scale without implying extensive objectives of social control and destruction of human life, i.e. slavery and genocide.” It also introduces the modern state of a somewhat permanent continuation of World War III as the “Quiet War,” and that it is currently and indefinitely “being conducted using subjective biological warfare, fought with silent weapons.” This document, dated from 1979, reads:

The Artificial Womb:

From the time a person leaves its mother’s womb, its every effort is directed towards building, maintaining, and withdrawing into artificial wombs, various sorts of substitute protective devices or shells. The objective of these artificial wombs is to provide a stable environment for both stable and unstable activity: to provide shelter for the evolutionary processes of growth, and maturity — i.e. survival; to provide security for freedom and to provide defensive protection for offensive activity. This is equally true of both the general public and the elite. However, there is a definite difference in the way each of these classes go about the solution of problems.

The Political Structure Of A Nation – Dependency:

The primary reason why the individual citizens of a country create a political structure is a subconscious wish or desire to perpetuate their own dependency relationship of childhood. Simply put, they want a human god to eliminate all risk from their life, pat them on the head, kiss their bruises, put a chicken on every dinner table, clothe their bodies, tuck them into bed at night, and tell them that everything will be alright when they wake up in the morning. This public demand is incredible, so the human god, the politician, meets incredibility with incredibility by promising the world and delivering nothing. So who is the bigger liar? The public? Or the godfather? This public behavior is surrender born of fear, laziness, and expediency. It is the basis of the welfare state as a strategic weapon, useful against a disgusting public.

–=–

Simulations (politicians) leading the dissimulated (citizenships)…

Welfare as a strategic weapon…

This lies in stark contrast to the Law of Nature, as the Law (Word) of God:

—=—

“…that thou mightest charge some that they teach no other doctrine (Law), Neither give heed to fables and endless genealogies, which minister questions, rather than godly edifying which is in faith (Truth): so do. Now the end of the commandment is charity out of a pure heart, and of a good conscience, and of faith (Truth) unfeigned: From which some having swerved have turned aside unto vain jangling; Desiring to be teachers of the law; understanding neither what they say, nor whereof they affirm.

—1 Timothy 1: 3-7, KJB

—=—

It is through dissimulation, through the agentic relationship of person-hood, that we have been turned away from our Natural course.

To be clear, let us explore what it is to lie in agency, especially under the tyranny of kings, popes, and the democracies (illiterate mob rule). Remember, while a person (status in society) is a legalistic simulation, believing in the false truth of the simulation and thus becoming one with it is dissimulation.

DUMMYnoun – One who holds legal title for another; a straw man. (Black’s Law Dictionary, 4th Edition)

DUMMYadjective – Sham; make-believe; pretended; imitation. As respects basis for predicating liability on parent corporation for acts of subsidiary, “agency,” “adjunct,” “branch,” “instrumentality,” “dummy,” “buffer,” and “toolall mean very much the SAME thing. (Black’s Law Dictionary, 4th Edition)

STRAWMAN – 1. A weak or imaginary opposition set up only to be easily confuted. 2. A person set up to serve as a cover for a usually questionable transaction. (Webster’s Ninth New Collegiate Dictionary)

STRAWMANA front, a third party who is put up in name only to take part in a transaction. Nominal party to a transaction; one who acts as an agent for another for the purposes of taking title to real property and executing whatever documents and instruments the principal may direct. Person who purchases property for another to conceal identity of real purchaser or to accomplish some purpose otherwise not allowed. (Black’s Law Dictionary, 6th Edition)

STRAWMAN – 1. A fictitious person, especially one that is weak or flawed. 2. A tenuous and exaggerated counterargument that an advocate puts forward for the sole purpose of disproving it. — Also termed straw-man argument. 3. A third party used in some transactions as a temporary transferee to allow the principal parties to accomplish something that is otherwise impermissible. 4. A person hired to post a worthless bail bond for the release of an accused. Also termed steaminess homo. (Black’s Law Dictionary 7th Edition)

STRAMINEUS HOMO: “Latin. A man of straw, one of NO SUBSTANCE,
put forward as
BAIL OR SURETY.” (Black’s Law Dictionary, 4th Edition)

AGENCYA RELATION, created either by EXPRESS OR IMPLIED CONTRACT or by law, whereby one party (called the principal or constituent) delegates the transaction of some lawful business or the authority to do certain acts for him or in relation to his rights or property, with more or less discretionary power, to another person (called the agent, attorney, proxy, or delegate) who undertakes to manage the affair and render him an account thereof. The contract of agency may be defined to be a contract by which one of the contracting parties confides the management of some affair, to be transacted on his account, to the other party, who undertakes to do the business and render an account of it. A contract by which one person, with greater or less discretionary power, undertakes to represent another in certain business relations. A relation between two or more persons, by which one party, usually called the agent or attorney, is authorized to do certain acts for, or in relation to (lie rights or property) of the other, who is denominated the principal, constituent, or employer. (Black’s Law Dictionary, 4th Edition)

–=–

The agency relationship of public US citizenships is simple: The principal (government) creates and employs a citizen-ship status (fictional persona) within its own created jurisdiction (fictional place), by which men (acting agents) use this commercial vessel (property) to conduct business and commerce. Essentially, a citizen is an employee of its employer (principal), and does all actions through that principal and its protections. This is why insurance is mandatory for citizenships (commercial vessels) of the United States, just as auto-insurance is mandatory to rent a car (commercial vehicle). If the agent crashes the car, the principal is responsible for the actions of its agents. Insurance alleviates that commercial burden, and is thus a legal requirement to dis-associate the liability of the principal from its agent, the employer from its employee, the user from its program (see the movie Tron).

To end this particular discourse on the 2nd pillar of fiction, we must address how God (Jehovah) Itself has been driven from our consciousness. It is foolish to argue over the Existence of God (Jehovah), when the very intent and definition of this VERB “Jehovah” is as the Universe, as all of Existence Itself in its infinite entirety. This state of Life in Nature then is the eternity of Being, again used as a verb to mean all of Existence as it stands at this and every moment. God (jehovah), in other words, is all that is Real, all that is not man-made. This is to say that Jehovah (God) is the Source of everything Real that can be simulated and dissimulated from. Jehovah (God) is Truth, thus all lies are dependent upon Reality, without which there would be no Reality (Truth) to lie about, and therefore no reason or source for such simulations. Without Truth there simply is no lie. Without Jehovah there simply is no satan (adversary). Again, this line of reasoning is self-evident.

If simulation is the opposite of Truth, and Jehovah (God) is defined as that which is the very Nature and Source of Truth, then we must recognize that each of us are a part of Jehovah. Without this understanding of the meaning of this word, as the substance of the very Source of Life Itself, and that by our very own Existence we are therefore each an intricate part of that whole of the concept of what is Jehovah (all of Being), we may never overcome that which dissimulates us from our very own Nature and place within It. Without faith (belief) in Jehovah as the only Reality of Truth and Life, we will forever be stuck in a man-made simulation of that which Is Jehovah.

But don’t believe me. Believe the Law as written in the Bible:

–=–

“God that made the world and all things therein, seeing that he is Lord of heaven and earth, dwelleth not in temples made with hands; Neither is worshipped with men’s hands, as though he needed any thing, seeing he giveth to all life, and breath, and all things

–Acts 17:24-25, KJB

–=–
Jehovah is the air and the water and the land and the stars we so take for granted, as that which gives us life and breath and sustenance to Exist. Religions are a simulation of the Bible, a lie told to dissimulate us from our God (Reality/Nature) and Its Law, from our very Nature of Existence and place within It.
But we must be careful and weary of such a spiritual understanding, for the men that seek to be as replacement gods (magistrates) on Earth and in their own hand-built temples give only artificial, legal life (false existence) to simulated persons (legal statuses), places (legal jurisdictions), and things (legal properties), over which the only means of control is through dissimulation from the One True God (as “Jehovah”). For none of these Exists in Nature (under God), and so none can be governed by the Law of Nature.
In the end, we may understand why it is that we may only have one God, and that we must choose between the God (verb) of Nature (Jehovah) and the god (noun/title) of mammon. And so in Part Three of this essay series, we will examine how the legal fiction of nations would fall under its own weight without the dissimulation created by the god (false existence) of mammon (artificial valuation) and its engrossing, nihilistic, empty tool of money (the currency of time).
Until then, may your gradual awakening from these four pillars of fiction be sufficiently painful and gut-wrenching that your own dis-ease of dis-simulation is cured. And as the legal superstructure falls further into dis-pair and thus dis-repair, dragging along with it all those dissimulated masses of men unable to break from that virtual, simulated copy of reality, may your spiritual awakening be strong enough to match and defend against the adversarial dark awakening happening simultaneously and adversarially to your own. For the darkness of dissimulation is coming online, as artificial intelligence, as an out of control matrix of lies. It is the legal mind unburdened by any higher, moral law, set free to recreate the world as it sees fit.
May your meekness be evident and your will to preserve that which gives us Life be stronger than that dissimulated force that seeks to dispose us of It.
May we find the spiritual path together…
.
Clint > richard-son (Realitybloger.wordpress.com)
Saturday, January 27th, 2018  (AD)
Advertisements

New Radio Show — Sunday’s At 5pm


Note: url not active yet. Special thanks to Jules for taking me on board the UCY.TV platform, and for all her hard work.

What’s to be found under the rose?

This show will be loosely designed around the recent release of my book, STRAWMAN, in order to learn and unlearn so many of the false truths we have been masterfully mislead with, in movements that never actually move, and with occasional guests to delight the palette.

It’s all in the name.

Tune in, because you’re already dead,
and what you don’t know is keeping you that way.

Archives to be stored at UCY.TV and Youtube, and at: CorporationNationRadioArchives.wordpress.com.

Pass it on!

.

–Clint (Realitybloger.wordpress.com)
–Tuesday, September 12th, 2017

Corporation Nation Radio, Now History (His Story)


It is with profound comfort and sadness that after more than 2 years I have decided to cease broadcasting with Republic Broadcasting Network 5 days a week. This decision reflects nothing regarding that station or its employees, and I wish to thank John Stadtmiller for trusting and allowing me such a platform in such a prime time. Republic is unfortunately a remnant of the old model of network radio being systematically abused, attacked, and made obsolete by the technology of the internet. John is fighting one hell of a battle to keep RBN breathing and even to keep the lights on. Many similar stations have fallen by the same methods, and to the fact that now anyone with a cheap consumer microphone can upload their own show into the digital ether. This ability is not, as many believe, a new kind of glorious digital liberty as much as it is a destructive anarchy of unchecked and non-vetted information.

With that said, and with the broadcast sphere of Youtube and do-it-yourself internet radio personalities all selling their own brand of perceptive virtual reality (i.e. “truth”) for monetary kickbacks, the saturation effect is in my opinion a well-played tool by those who wish to obfuscate legitimacy in alternative broadcasting.

And so I have decided to focus my time in finishing what is now destined to be a three-volume work, my book series called “Strawman: The Real Story Of Your Artificial Person,” realizing that all of these digital creations may be gone tomorrow, erased from the digital ether, and leaving nothing behind to show for it. I look forward to creating an actual work in book-form that is immune from that red button of virtual and digital destruction and censorship, and even from the false flag “EMP” that may accomplish the same trick.

The first volume of this work will be free to download at my other website soon, and I will announce its posting in (.pdf) format for free download in the next couple of months. Instructions on how to obtain a hard copy (unpublished, not public, non-commercial) will be included within. As it is a private work, it will not be available by drone from Amazon or any other retail source, and is not “commercially” available in any way. It may only be obtained from myself. You will understand why this was my choice, my election when you read it.

LINK –> StrawmanStory.info

While this privilege lasts, the internet gods are allowing my archives to be available for listening and download, again free of charge, at the external site listed below.

Special thanks to Drew Carter for not only being with me from the beginning, answering the call to archive these shows, but also for creating this searchable spreadsheet of notes and links for each show and other interviews I’ve done since on other networks. At this link and in this spreadsheet you will find links to all 487 shows plus descriptions of guests and their websites.

LINK –> https://corporationnationradioarchives.wordpress.com/2016/01/01/whew-data-entry-complete/

This spreadsheet may be updated with future shows where I am guest, and  these shows will be posted on the archive site if Drew has the time and gumption.

Of course, the original archives (with commercials not cut out) will be on the RBN website as well.

To the listener, please bear in mind that this show was a learning experience especially for myself, and so was a continuum of learning and shared knowledge as my guests and myself unraveled the not-so-hidden mysteries. And of course we will never in any of our lifetimes know it all. The point is that show #400 may include the presumption of information learned in show #300. In other words, because we have never tried to sell anything on this show, keeping its intent pure and charitable, we were actually there to learn and to teach without such low and mean distractions and monetary considerations. And so like in any school setting, missing the first half of lessons or not learning the early mathematical theories and answers may mean that later information is not able to be comprehended fully. And of course much of this journey of discovery was in correcting my own fallacious notions of history, of language, and of law, and especially of the spiritual, scriptural knowledge that cannot be discovered without learning the figurative and legal language it was written in. To read the kings law book one must learn the king’s “higher” language. This is what we have learned. We have attempted in every way to kill our superego by removing our respect of our strawman id-entity. Thus, the ego must die as well.

Thanks to all who have followed and stuck with me as we have broken down paradigms and utterly destroyed history. Thanks for your letters, your gifts of books and donations, and for your support in general. Equal thanks to the trolls who have had the opposite effect as they intended, which was to make me question everything and be extra careful to seek Reality over the perception of truth in fiction. And thanks to all my friends and family, both for their love and support (and patience) and for the abandonment and painful separation. I realized long ago that to be in search of the Reality of things is rare, and that seeking such Reality is the most self-offensive thing we can do. Nothing hurts more. Nothing is more offensive than the actual Truth of Reality. For we are all living our own lie in a very convincing fiction of law and society, and with religious and patriotic zeal we defend that lie to escape Reality, even to the death.

In the end, in my final shows, as I began to see more than I bargained for, as this debtor’s hell began to manifest before my eyes, my listening friends were not surprised to see me quit. They could hear it in my voice, a profound sobering and sadness, even a hopelessness manifesting in every new discovery. However, it is only through the act of destroying all hope and facing Reality head on without artifice that each of us may ever finally act upon our knowledge and stop ignoring the problems in the hopes of some superhero that will come and save the day. The return of the Savior. For even christ’s parabolic Word tells us that in the end we can only save ourselves.

And so I leave these words, these shows, as my gift to any who seek to learn from my own limited knowledge. I will continue to post to this blog, probably more often now without having a radio show every day, and I will continue to seek the solutions, not the remedies.

My next project, I have decided, in conjunction with my writings, is to make a research documentary about the history and possibility of establishing the modern version of a monastery. Since all of our land has been stolen (on paper) from under us, which is explained in detail in my work “Strawman,” our collective problem is that we have no where left to walk to. Our parents have nothing to leave us but defective, imperfect titles and debt paper. Our blood has been figuratively corrupted through our certified birth into the legal fiction, and we stand in public attainder through contract, without the ability to be lawful heirs. And so it is my belief, my passion, that we can make the idea of a religious society, a place of immunity and sanctuary from legal debauchery and pursuit of money in mammon cool again. We cannot be free without a place to be free. We cannot practice moral, natural law without a moral, natural place to do so without legal personification. And so I believe the monastery to be the answer, even as recognized by their law. For no law of man may stand in respect of True religious intent, and True religious intent means to never respect persons or flattering titles or the oaths they take.

“Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof…”

–=–

The meaning of this is lost simply because we are not parties to this constitution as public persons in contract. We attend churches that are legal corporations, which means they are not only respected but restricted by the legal law of government. In other words, every corporation calling itself a “church” or organized “religion” is under the legal law, not over it, defeating the entire purpose of being a religious man. Each of us is the temple, and our temple is enslaved and destroyed by our participation in legal affairs through citizenship. And so we must strive to escape such respect of artifice, by standing unseen in a Pure and True religious being based on Charity and Love, without any need or participation in legal things. We must shed our strawman and stop respecting others.

FREEDOM OF RELIGION – Embraces the concept of freedom to believe and freedom to act, the first of which (belief) is absolute, but the second of which (action) remains subject to regulation for protection of society. (Black’s Law Dictionary, 4th Edition)

–=–

To put it simply, a public U.S. citizen-ship has no right to practice any moral or religious law. This is Caesar’s society, not our own. For U.S. citizenship is the abandonment of free religion and is an acceptance of the national flattering title of legalized “Christian,” as if one can be born as a follower of christ without first obtaining years of knowledge of the scriptures. A nation cannot be a follower of christ, because a nation is a damned fiction of law, and all who respect it are in damnation. And whatever is born of the nation, all citizenships, are thus nationally whatever their creator establishes them as, which in the case of a Romanized, Latinized, “Christian Nation,” is a false, artificial title of “Christian” under Caesar (district of New Columbia). The word district in law means seizure. And all things are seized under Caesar, under this modern contractual feud of public citizenship. Essentially, even the self-proclaimed “atheist” while acting in U.S. citizenship is a corporate “Christian,” no different than those pagans who partook in Caesar’s empire and sat in the colosseums watching the True, uncontrollable followers of christ be fed to the lions.

This is the whole point of religion. For religion is the one and only exemption to the secular, legal (anti-Nature, anti-God) law of man. The only way to abjure the realm (jurisdiction) is to be convicted of crime or to join a monastery! This is well documented, and is also the difference between a private and public man.

The religions of church and state stand purposefully opposed to this, as incorporated institutions of the state designed to take man away from his True religion and provide a false temple “built by hands.”

And this brings me to the precipice, to the beginning of a new journey. I hope that you will be a part of it. I hope that you will help to spread my free work when released soon so that others may discover their own disposition so well occulted by public-mindedness, public education, and public entertainment. The legal matrix cannot be seen, for it is only a coded language artfully made to appear as Reality. The strawman cannot be viewed in the mirror, for it is only a false man built of paper, of contracts and mortgages (dead pledges) in mortmain (dead hands), of credits and debits, and of legal words and flattering titles that do not exist in Nature.

—=—

“Receive my instruction, and not silver;
and knowledge rather than choice gold.

For wisdom is better than rubies;
and all the things that may be desired
are not to be compared to it.”

—Proverbs 8: 10-11, KJB

—=—

All that I have gained I am now ready to render back to Caesar, for all I have acquired has always been the property of Caesar’s public persona, the strawman I have possessed like a demon since its birth, the puppet I breathe life into, the ship I sail on the sea of commerce. No possession, no trinket, no dwelling place, and no paper title is worth debt slavery in seizure (Caesar). I am ready to give up everything in fiction so as to embrace the Reality of Nature and Its Highest, self-evident Law. And so after years of debilitating hope and much talk I am ready to act, to find my way and to walk the spiritual path.

Perhaps we shall meet along the way.

Or perhaps we may build our dreams and find Reality again together.

Till then, there is an unlimited wealth of knowledge in this internet, even as traditional books and libraries are being figuratively burned and ignored. Deciphering that knowledge between so much bullshit is the ultimate challenge. And learning the language that enslaves us is the greatest task of all, which is the purpose of my upcoming works. When every word we speak has an opposing (legal) meaning in the jurisdiction (fictional realm) of  the church and state, we can attain only false enlightenment. We cannot read the scriptures in common English, for it is purposefully designed to be the language of illiteracy, the public language of the multitude of goyim. The priest-class never gave us the tool to decipher the Bible because they reserved the Latin meanings of their words for themselves. And our laws are written in the same, “higher” language of that spell-craft. And so a master and professor of the English language is at best a complete idiot, so in love with the meanings of the lowest, vulgar form of words that all sense of Reality is gone, as the word becomes more important than the Nature of Reality so named. And we teach each new generation in the same vulgarity, keeping the human capital management system intact through sheer nightmarish ignorance of language.

My work is designed to teach that “higher” language as they who created it have labeled it, not to use it as they do to induce harm but to defeat it utterly by recognizing its purpose. For it can only be used as a lie, as all things legal or “higher” are a lie.

But I digress…

I cannot place thousands of pages and definitions into one simple blog post. I hope that you will find enlightenment in my upcoming works.

Thank you again to all who have joined me on this journey.

And remember that everything in the legal realm is artificial, including your self. This is the key to knowledge.

–=–

“For all the gods of the nations are idols…”

—Psalms 96:5, KJB

–=–

.

–Clint Richardson (Realitybloger.wordpress.com)
–Friday, January 8th, 2016

Debunking Education: Exposing The Syndicate


Author’s note: The following presentation is designed to give a general overview of how organized crime has replaced not only government, but the cherished institutions we’re trained like animals to participate in and respect the opinions of. The “syndicate” as is uncovered here is the foundation of all legitimacy and right granted to the worst of criminal enterprise. While the focus here is foundational, the reader may apply their knowledge of such subjects as Common Core, the Delphi Technique, Lobbying, special interests, consensus building, monopolies and trusts, grants, uniform codes and regulations, and all other psychological tools and conditioning that allow the unthinkable to permeate as normality within our government and its institutions. In order to comprehend just how vaccination, Geo-engineering, cloning, psychiatry, unnecessary live animal research, and so many otherwise immoral and unethical practices that would otherwise be shunned in society are instead accepted as normal and as “best practices” within the various institutions regulated by government,  we must expose the centralized criminal organization that represents the authority behind those acceptations. And so here I present to you the underbelly of the beast – organized crime that I call the syndicate.

–=–
Debunking Education:
Exposing The Syndicate.
–=–

.

–=–

“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”

–=–

“Generally, more highly educated people, who have higher incomes,
consume more resources than poorly educated people,
who tend to have lower incomes. In this case,
more education increases the threat to sustainability.”

–Education for Sustainable Development Toolkit Vol.2 2002

–=–

Have you ever seriously considered that education is the best and truest form of mass programming, or as Charlotte Iserbyt calls it in her now infamous book of primary research horror, The Deliberate Dumbing Down Of America? Is there more to it than just tainted textbooks and the drive to make kids less intelligent? Is there a criminal element organized at the very top that can only maintain its control and authoritarian grip on industry through this institutionalized education process, never allowing deviation from the prescribed curriculum of professors (those who profess) in a closed loop university system?

Many have considered the fleeting fancy that this is so… but establishing without doubt this notion as the foundational and obvious disposition regarding the institution of education is another matter. Mrs. Iserbyt certainly does a good job of creating the case through documentation and historical perspective, but is there some deeper aspect to this that we can delve into to prove the fraud of education as a cover for the continued inducement of organized crime?

It is my intention here to do just that.

We generally bow down to popular opinion as the majority of “normal” and “educated” people use fallacious defenses against reasonable criticism towards the education system, like titling those who question the institution of university and education as “conspiracy freaks”, even when those tomes of research comes from a former presidential appointed politician to the Federal Department of Education like Mrs. Iserbyt, who has nothing to share but first hand knowledge.

In topics of such depth and misunderstanding, sometimes the proof is in the very foundation of the object to be proved.

Not only does the central education curriculum promote a fallacious normalcy bias to protect itself and its vested interest in most walks of corporate society (education as a perfectly normal requirement for “success” in industry), it re-presents to students and teachers false history to build that bias within its own learning tools, professing the most convenient of historical biases to promote the need of its own continuity – as the preserver and teacher of history. It categorizes everything into “subjects”, as if one part of life were totally separate from the other and therefore must be taught and learned as such, thus creating “experts” with no expertise in anything but a tunnel-visioned set of false-dialectics on their particular subject of expertise. In reality, the education system has an audacious underbelly that needs to be comprehended in today’s institutional and political forum, as new standards such as “Common Core” are being implemented for ever more global centralization of what is deemed as well-adjusted “normalcy”.

To understand just what this education system is designed to do to our young and mature minds alike, we must be able to examine without bias its true structure, intent, and authority; dating back many centuries and subsisting through many empires. You see, the institution of education is what is called a syndicate.

The syndicate has always been there. It involves the most important of industries: from education, medication, legalization, appropriation, codification, and regulation. In other words, for the syndicate to maintain control over society in both profit and in the perception of its falsely projected final authority, it must be in control of government (public) opinion, medical opinion, legal opinion, access to financial grants (free taxpayer money), and most importantly the group-think opinion of the university system from whence all credentialed minds flow.

This is accomplished in modern times through the creation and use of private, non-governmental organizations and associations (NGO’s), from the American Medical Association (AMA) to the American and International Bar Associations (ABA/IBA), the National Teachers Association (NTA) and Parent Teachers Association (PTA), to the National Governors Association (NGA), which by the way holds the copyright to Common Core Standards. These completely private associations work together to impose an organized syndicate that controls the flow and false-legitimacy (stamp of approval) of information while guaranteeing profit-friendly regulation of industry. The money is of course syndicated through the Federal Reserve System, another politically “independent” association, representing the control of funding via congressional committees – the literal creator of money. This process of money creation is called “appropriation”, and it makes new taxpayer money instantly available today by creating new national debt due tomorrow. In other words, all taxpayer money collected today by the central government syndicate was already spent yesterday, the main reason it can’t be paid down. For government is ultimately the head banker; the creator, appropriator, and regulator of currency; another very important cog in the organized criminal monopoly via its publicly perceived and accepted simulacrum of legitimacy, despite its known and admitted de facto (illegitimate) nature.

The syndicate ensures and insures trust monopolies and legal standards that promote those monopolies, even as it wages war on any information or other competition that may contradict it. The syndicate is not only the seller of lies it is the promoter and insurer of them, literally syndicating its lies through mass media. Through education, the general population never comprehends the true nature of the syndicate, for its ties are not readily comprehensible and it is certainly not taught in school! Each organized institution within the syndicate is presented as a separate self-governing entity, which appears to be individually scrutinized and regulated by the other institutions that lie within the same syndicate. And yet they are all working together in syndication to promote and keep their monopoly of fraud going, each promoting the legitimacy of the other.

This is the normalization of fraud. The syndicate even teaches the proper management of fraud in schools, while producing a stage-show for the benefit of the educated people, utilizing the predictive programming taught in schools and universities to enhance the ego and appeal of the masses to their own unreasonable but authorized (syndicated) authority. As long as the money and retirement benefits flow, the syndicate remains a legitimized criminal authority in all things.

It is not that the government is the syndicate, it is that the syndicate slowly infiltrated and took over the running of the government from its inception. And from the centralized criminal government were spawned these several institutions to control each facet of industry. Thus we have the Department of Education, the Department of Health and Human Services, the Department of Justice,  the Department of Treasury, the Department of Labor, and the individual agencies of the FDA, EPA, the Fed, and so many others. Today, private associations make the rules for government and industry, and include members that are the law makers themselves, the attorneys, the doctors, the pharmacists, the teachers… even the students have their own student “association”. Each of these seemingly separate groups are the created and promoted non-governmental associations of the syndicate, and these member-groups ensure the future normalcy bias and inducement process of men and women into the work environment within the syndicate. And for those that are not members, we seemingly have no choice but to study from the textbooks that are created by the corporations and funded by the syndicate itself, for the syndicate also holds the exclusive power to bestow title, to give credentials, to grant degrees, and to graduate men and women with false honors and flattering titles. The syndicate makes the rules and requirements for graduation, which of course always include only syndicated (approved) texts and learning materials. And no other school or university may be established without the syndicate’s approval and adherence to its required standards and practices.

–=–
Killing Us Softly:
The Etymology Of Education
–=–

So how do you define the word education?

To tame the wild beast…

Before we can fully recognize the roots and true intent of the mandatory education system implemented by the central syndicate, we must comprehend just who is behind that system, and just what its true intent is and always has been. The university education system, its foundation and a true description of its profess-ors, and all of the preparatory “grades” necessary to reach that university “degree” of education – to finally be granted permission to work within these syndicated corporate industries –  is defined by Black’s Law Dictionary, 1st Edition quite plainly:

SYNDIC. In the civil law. An advocate or patron; a burgess or recorder; an agent or attorney who acts for a corporation or university; an actor or procurator; an assignee. In French law. The person who is commissioned by the courts to administer a bankruptcy. He fulfills the same functions as the trustee in English law, or assignee in America. The term is also applied to the person appointed to manage the affairs of a corporation.

SYNDICOS. One chosen by a college, municipality, etc., to defend its cause.

SYNDICATE. A university committee. A combination of persons or firms united for the purpose of enterprises too large for individuals to undertake; or a group of financiers who buy up the shares of a company in order to sell them at a profit by creating a scarcity.

SYNDACALISM (n.) – In 1907, from French syndicalismemovement to transfer ownership of means of production and distribution to industrial workers,” from syndicalof a labor union,” from syndicchief representative” (see syndic). “Syndicalism” is in France the new, all-absorbing form of Labor’s conflict with Capital. Its growth has been so rapid that its gravity is not appreciated abroad. This year, even more than last, the strikes and other “direct action,” which it has combined, have upset the industrial life of the country, and forced the attention of Parliament and Government. [“The Nation,” June 20, 1907]

COMBINATION. A conspiracy, or confederation of men for unlawful or violent deeds. A union of different elements. A patent may be taken out for a new combination of existing machines.

CONFEDERATIONA league or compact for mutual support, particularly of princes, nations, or states. Such was the colonial government during the Revolution.

CONFEDERACY – In criminal law. The association or banding together of two or more persons for the purpose of committing an act or furthering an enterprise which is forbidden by law, or which, though lawful in itself, becomes unlawful when made the object of the confederacy. Conspiracy is a more technical term for this offense. The act of two or more who combine together to do any damage or injury to another, or to do any unlawful act. In equity pleading. An improper combination alleged to have been entered into between the defendants to a bill in equity. In international law. A league or agreement between two or more independent states whereby they unite for their mutual welfare and the furtherance of their common aims. The term may apply to a union so formed for a temporary or limited purpose, as in the case of an offensive and defensive alliance; but it is more commonly used to denote that species of political connection between two or more independent states by which a central government is created, invested with certain powers of sovereignty, (mostly external,) and acting upon the several component states as its units, which, however, retain their sovereign powers for domestic purposes and some others. See FEDERAL GOVERNMENT.

–=–

Of course, you are not supposed to know that the federal government is actually built with intent as a simple and explicit “conspiracy” to commit unlawful acts; defined as “a combination of persons or firms united for enterprises too large for individuals to undertake“. But you need to know that this nation was created by the Articles of Confederation, which may as well be called the Articles of Conspiracy. For these words mean exactly the same thing! Just why do you think the word conspiracy is so demonized in meaning and application within the media portion of the syndicate, while the founding word “confederation” is worshiped and made to appear as if it was historically God-given?

A conspiracy and a confederation are simply defined as two or more persons organizing to defraud others. Nothing more, nothing less. And that is exactly what the Articles of Confederation achieved, leading to the constitution; a compact of debt, obligation, and enfranchisement of all men into corporate persons and debtors in an open-air prison called the United States.

The idea of syndicalism was quite successful, luring men from their families, their self-sufficient lifestyle, and their inherited land and communities into the rent and mortgage schemes within the megalopolises and manufacturing bases, inducting us into the various industries of the syndicate with the advertising and promotion of products and services. Labor unions, a communist ideal, had the very real goal of combinations of common men for the purpose of a private protected confederacy within the corporate structure. Monopolies and trusts were built, and the syndicate’s so-called industrial revolution successfully altered America into a syndicalist nation.

Labeled as “equal rights”, labor unions pitted brother against brother using the legal law to protect favoritism of member workers despite the unheard cry of equality for all men. The family farm and self-sufficiency was replaced by syndicated reality of production in factory assembly lines, where men owned and kept nothing of their own labor. And the means of production was violently switched from the individual and local people into the corporate and industrial syndicate. Homemade became industry made.  “Made in America” became “made in China”. The promise of more money and fatter pensions (the Biblical worship of mammon) secured the subversion of dignity, pride, and honor. The importance of the family unit became secondary to the importance of employment.

Once the means of production was centralized it could be exported, leaving a once independent people dependent on the retail imports and monopolized sweatshop industries of the syndicate and its foreign trade. Of course it was American syndicalist investments that built those foreign factories. Most importantly, through the education system (animal work training), men were learned with extremely limiting skills that could only be utilized in the syndicalist  industries and machine shops, creating a new form of ultimately skill-less laborer highly trained in a single employable (usable) function that was worthless outside of the syndicate (in nature) and its machinery. And those singly educated men were rewarded for this institutionalized ignorance by union membership and the detrimental benefits therein bestowed.

This incentive-based culling instilled the evolution of free men into employed men; and the words free and self-sufficient became known as “unemployment”. Of course unemployment simply means non-taxed and not syndicated – a description of both the poor and the entrepreneur. Even the savvy man was convinced to become “self-employed”, so that he could be taxed and managed in his or her capacity to produce and compete with the syndicate. Of course, most small businesses fold under such pressure and rigged competition.

Today, with the syndicate strong and men weak in their knowledge and life experience away from nature and its laws, the slow dismantling of labor unions represents the syndication of them into the legal codes of the syndicate. With all men dependent upon it, the syndicate can now pay less and charge more, for the new generations haven’t a clue that it was ever any other way. Equal pay for equal labor – the pathetic cry of the oppressed.

EMPLOY‘ – verb transitive [Latin plico.] 1. To occupy the time, attention and labor of; to keep busy, or at work; to use. We employ our hands in labor; we employ our heads or faculties in study or thought; the attention is employed, when the mind is fixed or occupied upon an object; we employ time, when we devote it to an object. A portion of time should be daily employed in reading the scriptures, meditation and prayer; a great portion of life is employed to little profit or to very bad purposes. 2. To use as an instrument or means. We employ pens in writing, and arithmetic in keeping accounts. We employ medicines in curing diseases. 3. To use as materials in forming any thing. We employ timber, stones or bricks, in building; we employ wool, linen and cotton, in making cloth. 4. To engage in one’s service; to use as an agent or substitute in transacting business; to commission and entrust with the management of one’s affairs. The president employed an envoy to negotiate a treaty. Kings and States employ embassadors at foreign courts. 5. To occupy; to use; to apply or devote to an object; to pass in business; as, to employ time; to employ an hour, a day or a week; to employ one’s life. To employ one’s self, is to apply or devote one’s time and attention; to busy one’s self.

EMPLOY’noun That which engages the mind, or occupies the time and labor of a person; business; object of study or industry; employment. Present to grasp, and future still to find, The whole employ of body and of mind. 1. Occupation, as art, mystery, trade, profession. 2. Public office; agency; service for another.

SERV’ICEnoun  [From Latin servitium.] 1. In a general sense, labor of body or of body and mind, performed at the command of a superior, or the pursuance of duty, or for the benefit of another. service is voluntary or involuntary. Voluntary service is that of hired servants, or of contract, or of persons who spontaneously perform something for another’s benefit. Involuntary service is that of slaves, who work by compulsion. 2. The business of a servant; menial office. 3. Attendance of a servant. 4. Place of a servant; actual employment of a servant; as, to be out of service. 5. Any thing done by way of duty to a superior6. Attendance on a superior.

–=–

Voluntary servitude… now where have I heard that before? No one may wish to ponder the role of money and monopolized industry as the instigators of voluntary slavery, but the shoe certainly fits. This brave new institutionalized world was created to replace the old forms of master and slave relationship, evolving the slave mentality into one of common patriotic service to industry and state (which are the same thing) – the basis of functionality of the syndicate. The words voluntary and involuntary are now so intertwined that most people have no idea what the word slave really means, simply because they can choose which form of labor they are employed (used) in as service to the syndicate.

Of course, modern ideas of slavery involve Hollywood’s version of the black man with chains around his neck.

But let’s go back to a time when Webster still roamed the land, speaking truth in his defining of terms.

SLAVE, noun 1. A person who is wholly subject to the will of another; one who has no will of his own, but whose person and services are wholly under the control of another. In the early state of the world, and to this day among some barbarous nations, prisoners of war are considered and treated as slaves. The slaves of modern times are more generally purchased, like horses and oxen. 2. One who has lost the power of resistance; or one who surrenders himself to any power whatever; as a slave to passion, to lust, to ambition. 3. A mean person; one in the lowest state of life. 4. A drudge; one who labors like a slave(–Webster’s 1828 Dictionary)

SLA’VERY, noun [See Slave.] 1. Bondage; the state of entire subjection of one person to the will of another. slavery is the obligation to labor for the benefit of the master, without the contract of consent of the servant. slavery may proceed from crimes, from captivity or from debt. slavery is also voluntary or involuntary; voluntary, when a person sells or yields his own person to the absolute command of another; involuntary, when he is placed under the absolute power of another without his own consent. slavery no longer exists in Great Britain, not in the northern states of America. 2. The offices of a slave; drudgery. (–Webster’s 1828 Dictionary)

–=–

And so you see, a slave by any other employable name, is still merely a slave.

Now, one might fallaciously argue (advocate) the fact that because they are paid equally as others in their employ (use) or because they are part of a labor union (a syndicalist) making them house slaves who receive a bit more pay than those other supposedly equal slaves, that employment is not actual slavery. Read again! The use of a currency which represents nothing but debt is not designed as a payment tool, but as a limiting object for voluntary slaves so they never get ahead. The wealthy elite of the syndicate aren’t as much interested in obtaining wealth as they are in having enough wealth so as to have no objects in front of them limiting their own freedom within their own syndicate. The only way this can happen is if they employ the rest of the population with limited circulation of money, obstructing their ability at self-sufficiency through currency exchange. And through the system of education this false sense of freedom is instilled upon the common class so that they volunteer against their best interests to be employed within the syndicate, never self-actualizing their own disposition. Our freedom is only what the state allows it to be, for the word freedom is yet another misunderstood word, and its true definition is not taught in public school (training of animals for future employment).

Employment is like addiction. Sure, you can claim that you can quit your job at any time, but then how will you quench your addiction to buying stuff, and for that matter your addiction to food and shelter? After all, it’s all but illegal to obtain food without money or permission from government to hunt and fish! Raw dairy is outlawed and highly regulated. Live animal restrictions abound. And small backyard gardens are next on the regulation chopping block.

But it’s a free country…

All slaves and livestock are of course free within their master’s borders and fences.

Bouvier’s 1856 Dictionary of Law, which was commissioned to be “ADAPTED TO THE CONSTITUTION AND LAWS OF THE UNITED STATES OF AMERICA AND OF THE SEVERAL STATES OF THE AMERICAN UNION”, explains what freedom really is…

FREEDOM – Liberty; the right to do what is not forbidden by law. Freedom does not preclude the idea of subjection to law; indeed, it presupposes the existence of some legislative provision, the observance of which insures freedom to us, by securing the like observance from others.

–=–

And so a whole population is employed (in usury) by the slave-masters of the syndicate, who train the population in school to believe in a false notion of what freedom actually is. And the population then runs around claiming (professing) to be a free people while never knowing that freedom means forced servitude to the laws created by the syndicate and legislated though the state… or else a boot to the face. And many are employed (used) to be the boot against their own fellow slaves, forcefully ensuring a perpetually indentured society; paid mercenaries called police and military whose authority doesn’t actually exist but for the belief by the overpowering 100’s of millions that it does. A uniform and badge goes a long way in instilling faith in what does not exist but in name and credential only.

–=–
The Dictator:
Institutionalization Of God’s Legal Laws
–=–

Like every religion-based government institution of the past, the United States claims God as its foundation, somehow making right and equitable the economic enslavement of all people within its borders through its own legally bound doctrine of law. This will be clarified as we proceed…

Perhaps we should call this syndicate what it really is… a confederation theory.

The word syndicate is broken down as such:

SYN – “together with, jointly; alike; at the same time,” from Greek synwith, together with, along with, in the company of.”

DICTION – “expression of ideas in words,” from Late Latin dictionem, a noun of action from dic, past participle stem of Latin dicere speak, tell, say“, related to dicare proclaim, dedicate,” and from Old English teon to accuse,” tæcan to teach“).

–=–

This combination creates the foundation of an unseen dictatorship. It is after all foolish to believe that the word dictator refers to just one individual as dictator. Congress is certainly a dictator via its E Pluribus Unum, (out of many, one) enfranchisement. Congress is simply a confederation; a combination of men who syndicate.

DICTATOR – late 14c., from Latin dictator, agent noun from dictare (see dictate (v.)). Transferred sense of “one who has absolute power or authority” in any sphere is from c.1600. In Latin use, a dictator was a judge in the Roman republic temporarily invested with absolute power.

SHIP – word-forming element meaning “quality, condition; act, power, skill; office, position; relation between,” Middle English -schipe, from Old English -sciepe, Anglian -scipstate, condition of being,” from Proto-Germanic *-skapaz (cognates: Old Norse -skapr, Danish -skab, Old Frisian -skip, Dutch -schap, German -schaft), from *skap-to create, ordain, appoint,” from PIE root *(s)kep- (see shape (v.)).

E Pluribus Unum

Emblem on Continental Currency $40 note (1778)

–=–

To put it simply, a dictatorship is what one calls the state of being governed by those who dictate the law as “one” body politic (one corporate body). In this way, any form of government is thus a dictatorship, no matter how large a “combination” and “confederation” those lawmakers account for, and no matter how many constituents they claim to re-present. Even a so-called “democracy” is simply a dictatorship of the foolish majority over the foolish minority, neither group ever comprehending what a simple dictatorship is – a non-stop cruise-line; destination: subjection and extortion. And the majority and the minority never comprehend their equally important parts played in the legitimization of the syndicated congressional dictatorship simply through the act of voting – unwittingly confirming through voting cycle after cycle the dictatorial combination you now know as “the syndicate.”

To vote is to legitimize the syndicate.

How many times have we heard that this candidate is bought and paid for by “Big Pharma”, that this party has sold out to “Big Oil”, and that those party affiliated senators support banks over people? Well of course they do. They are all part of the same monopolized syndicate. And just so you understand, political parties are also non-governmental, private associations, which have infiltrated and now control the actions and reputations of politicians.

It would be immature to simply believe and dismiss this association (combination/confederation) of regulators, lawmakers, and corporations as simple greed. For the syndicate thrives on power and authority as any dictatorship has and will. Its purpose is not payoffs behind the scenes, but perpetual control over the entire population by its combined brotherhood and its spawn. Greed is too simplistic. The syndicate wishes to play god.

So that we fully understand, a syndicate is defined above as a university committee. In case you haven’t noticed, most of the research grants and studies that are created, that directly correlate to the medical and pharmaceutical industries, come from and are completed through the university system. Most of the other research is done at these medical and pharma companies themselves, where they literally test and report on their own laboratory creations funded by taxpayer dollars in the 100’s of billions; labeled as research and development (R&D) grants. Free money…

The FDA, as an integral and completely controlled regulatory agency of the syndicate, sweeps in for “public” good and consumption, placing its required stamp of approval on these harmful and deadly pharmaceutical drugs without ever testing any of them itself, instead relying on the “integrity” of its own syndicate corporations (combination/confederation/conspiracy) to promote and advocate its own portion of the syndicated monopoly. The word “public” is just another definition of E Pluribus Unum – from many voices, one false consensus-based opinion (out of many, one), where the voices of the many are never heard by the dictator-ship sailing us all into oblivion. For it is the opinion of the syndicate in the end that retains the right to possess the only opinion that has any “authority”.

Massive amounts of taxpayer money ends up in the university system as well, mostly hidden from the public within investment funds and touted as research grants, not to mention unreasonably high tuition rates to pay for it all. The syndicate creates the requirement of education to enter into industry, and so it can charge anything it wishes for a diploma allowing one to be employable in its syndicate. Of course the government is always listed as a patent holder of whatever novel disease or counterpart medical breakthrough, drug, or vaccine is created through the education/research part of the syndicate, for it supplies a direct link to the wallets of all the taxpayers of the United States. And that is the ultimate power of all – the power of the purse. But the purposeful side-effect of this syndicate insures a steady influx of patients that are made sick by its forced monopoly on all things food, health, medical, and pharmaceutical. And the syndicate protects itself through its total control of the BAR associations that in turn control the courts and thus public opinion. In essence, the population are mere guinea pigs for the syndicate, suffering and sometimes reporting negative side-effects only after drugs are already approved as “safe and effective” by the stage-play act known as the FDA.

The correct legal term for this fact, ironically, is that we are indeed legal patients of the syndicate. We allow the syndicate to use us exactly as they wish: as test-subjects. And without legal remedy of complaint due to the syndication and limitation of those legal avenues and the associations that run and regulate them, we are indeed merely a population of full-time patients:

PATIENT, adjective pa’shent. [Latin patiens.] 1. Having the quality of enduring evils without murmuring or fretfulness; sustaining afflictions of body or mind with fortitude, calmness or christian submission to the divine will; as a patient person, or a person of patient temper. It is followed by or before the evil endured; as patient of labor or pain; patient of heat or cold. 2. Not easily provoked; calm under the sufferance of injuries or offenses; not revengeful. 3. Persevering; constant in pursuit or exertion; calmly diligent. Whatever I have done is due to patient thought. 4. Not hasty; not over eager or impetuous; waiting or expecting with calmness or without discontent(noun) A person or thing that received impressions from external agents; he or that which is passively affected. Malice is a passion so impetuous and precipitate, that it often involves the agent and the patient 1. A person diseased or suffering bodily indisposition. It is used in relation to the physician; as, the physician visits his patient morning and evening. 2. It is sometimes used absolutely for a sick person. It is wonderful to observe how inapprehensive these patients are of their disease. (–Webster’s 1828 Dictionary)

–=–

We, the citizen-patients seem to have no inkling that our collective disease (political, mental, and physical) is purposefully caused and carefully managed by the syndicate, and that the syndicate is the disease of government. This gives new definition to the concept of “managed healthcare.” Instead, we can behold an abused and decimated population base that is so ill and not of right mind that perhaps it cannot muster the mental and physical response to fight back or seek revenge. And so the viscous cycle of disease continues as a profitable business-as-usual model under the syndicate, and the “people” remain hopelessly beholden to its authority as nothing more than mental patients.

–=–
How Attorneys Project The Syndicate
By Controlling Imput And Output Data
–=–

 The concept and goals of what is called advocacy are not at all dissimilar in function to what is today known by title as lobbyists, pundits, or political shills. An attorney, also known as an advocate or agent, literally re-presents some person or thing within an official capacity (an artificial realm of legal) in order to attempt to legitimize and sway opinions in favor of that subject matter. An advocate’s duty is to shift public opinion in order to create a normalcy bias and thus a general acceptance to the object of his or her advocacy.

So how does the syndicate utilize advocates in its total control system?

To start, the majority of our legislature (the law-makers) are generally attorneys, all pledged to the same private BAR association. Many of our presidents, including Obama, have been pledged attorneys as well. Likewise, most governors, and of course all legal persons in the Judicial Branch and Justice System are now required to be BAR member attorneys, while the Supreme Court of the United States generally refuses to hear non-BAR presented cases. Sometimes we forget that a member of some thing is also an advocate of that thing, for without that fictional thing, their fictional legal title would not exist. And so having BAR members as advocates of an International Bar Association full of advocate-attorneys working in syndication as the law-makers, executive force, and judicial overseer seems to be an obvious combination and confederacy with just a cursory glance. Our government is full of advocates and is thus in a severe epidemic state of conflict of interest. And the rest are bankers, doctors, accountants, and other professionals that hold their credentials and titles only because of and on behalf of the fictional institutions within the syndicate, creating not a government but an advocacy group posing as government – a simulation of legitimacy and of reality.

In other words, by default, any person with a diploma and job title that requires a college “education” must therefore hold (confirm) the fraudulent syndicate and government to be legitimate while being an unwitting advocate of the education system that bestows the allowance to be titled. Any person with a vested interest in some thing will always advocate for that thing, especially if their power and authority (credentials) stem solely from that very thing – the creator of those credentials. And enticing us as prostitutes with a bit of syndicated money helps ensure advocacy. Institutionalized “professionals” can seldom be expected to bite the hand and source of their own fraudulent existence as titled and credentialed professionals within the syndicate. Their very careers depend upon the existence and continuity of the syndicate, without which their flattering titles would hold no meaning or authority. They are literally professed as being experts, thus the term professional. If you understand this, you understand the power of the syndicate over morals, ethics, reason, and logic, which are no longer contemplations of men but rather defined concepts of the syndicate, their true meaning squashed by statute and legalese. The syndicate, for all intents and purposes, is the god of such concepts. The syndicate is the creator of titled gentry such as doctors, lawyers, pharmacists, CEO’s, and politicians. And so the monopoly extends not only over industry, but over the ethical and moral capacity and general operating procedure of those industries, including government itself.

The syndicate then places its paid, mind controlled advocates into its various controlled institutions, such as education and medicine.

From these places of perceived credibility and monopolized authority, through officially syndicate-credentialed scientists, biologists, professors, teachers, and research specialists, the syndicate can literally make anything happen, get anything approved, make anything appear and be defined as moral and ethical, and create any exception and acceptation to any rule or code (legal exemption) it wishes. It can do this simply because its advocates are everywhere within these institutions, ensuring pro-syndicate cause and effect models to create the desired “public opinion,” E Pluribus Unum,without question. They are the presidents, the faculty, the doctorates, the legal council, the regulators, the professors, the professionals, and the go-betweens.

The word advocate is defined as:

AD’VOCATE, noun [Latin advocatus, from advoco, to call for, to plead for; of ad and voco, to call. See vocal.] 1. advocate in its primary sense, signifies, one who pleads the cause of another in a court of civil law. Hence, 2. One who pleads the cause of another before any tribunal or judicial court, as a barrister in the English courts. We say, a man is a learned lawyer and an able advocate In Europe, advocates have different titles, according to their particular duties. Consistorial advocates, in Rome, appear before the Consistory, in opposition to the disposal of benefices. Elective advocates are chosen by a bishop, abbot, or chapter, with license from the prince. Feudal advocates were of a military kind, and to attach them to the church, had grants of land, with power to lead the vassals of the church war. Fiscal advocates, in ancient Rome, defended causes in which the public revenue was concerned. Juridical advocates became judges, in consequence of their attending causes in the earl’s court. Matricular advocates defended the cathedral churches. Military advocates were employed by the church (government) to defend it by arms, when force gave law to Europe. Some advocates were called nominative, from their being nominated by the pope or king; some regular, from their being qualified by a proper course of study. Some were supreme; others, subordinate. Advocate, in the German polity, is a magistrate, appointed in the emperor’s name, to administer justice. Faculty of advocates, in Scotland, is a society of eminent lawyers, who practice in the highest courts, and who are admitted members only upon the severest examination, at three different times. It consists of about two hundred members, and from this body are vacancies on the bench usually supplied. Lord advocate in Scotland, the principal crown lawyer, or prosecutor of crimes. Judge advocate in courts martial, a person who manages the prosecution. In English and American courts, advocates are the same as counsel, or counselors. In England, they are of two degrees, barristers and serjeants; the former, being apprentices or learners, cannot, by ancient custom, be admitted serjeants, till of sixteen years standing. 3. One who defends, vindicates, or espouses a cause, by argument; one who is friendly to; as, an advocate for peace, or for the oppressed. In scripture, Christ is called an advocate for his people. We have an advocate with the father. 1John 2:1. (–Webster’s 1828 Dictionary)

AD’VOCATE – (verb transitive) To plead in favor of; to defend by argument, before a tribunal; to support or vindicate. Those who advocate a discrimination. The Duke of York advocated the amendment. The Earl of Buckingham advocated the original resolution. The idea of a legislature, consisting of a single branch, though advocated by some, was generally reprobated… A part only of the body, whose cause be advocates, coincide with him in judgment. (–Webster’s 1828 Dictionary)

ADVOCATE –  See Judge-Advocate. An assistant ; an associate in conducting a lawsuit. A person who makes a profession of presenting cases orally. Of advocates, or (as we more generally call them) counsel, there are two species or degrees: barristers and sergeants. In the United States no distinction is made between an advocate and an attorney. (–W.C. Anderson 1889 Dictionary of Law)

FACULTY – noun [Latin facultas, from facio, to make.] 1. That power of the mind or intellect which enables it to receive, revive or modify perceptions; as the faculty of seeing, of hearing, of imagining, of remembering, etc.: or in general, the faculties may be called the powers or capacities of the mind. 2. The power of doing any thing; ability3. The power of performing any action, natural, vital or animal. The vital faculty is that by which life is preserved. 4. Facility of performance; the peculiar skill derived from practice, or practice aided by nature; habitual skill or ability; dexterity; adroitness; knack. One man has a remarkable faculty of telling a story; another, of inventing excuses for misconduct; a third, of reasoning; a fourth, of preaching. 5. Personal quality; disposition or habit, good or ill. 6. Power; authority9. Privilege; a right or power granted to a person by favor or indulgence, to do what by law he may not do; as the faculty of marrying without the bans being first published, or of ordaining a deacon under age. The archbishop of Canterbury has a court of faculties, for granting such privileges or dispensations. 10. In colleges, the masters and professors of the several sciences. One of the members or departments of a university. In most universities there are four faculties; of art, including humanity and philosophy; of theology; of medicine; and of law. In America, the faculty of a college or university consists of the president, professors and tutors. The faculty of advocates, in Scotland, is a respectable body of lawyers who plead in all causes before the Courts of Session, Justiciary and Exchequer. (–Webster’s 1828 Dictionary)

COUNSELOR, noun 1. Any person who gives advice; but properly one who is authorized by natural relationship, or by birth, office or profession, to advise another in regard to his future conduct and measures. Ahithophel was Davids counselor. His mother was his counselor to do wickedly. 2Chronicles 22:1. In Great Britain, the peers of the realm are hereditary counselor of the crown. 2. The members of a counsel; one appointed to advise a king or chief magistrate, in regard to the administration of the government. 3. One who is consulted by a client in a law case; one who gives advice in relation to a question of law; one whose profession is to give advice in law, and manage causes for clients. Privy counselor is a member of a privy counsel. (–Webster’s 1828 Dictionary)

COUNSEL, noun [Latin , to consult; to ask, to assail.] 1. Advice; opinion, or instruction, given upon request or otherwise, for directing the judgment or conduct of another; opinion given upon deliberation or consultation. Every purpose is established by counsel Proverbs 20:5. Thou hast not hearkened to my counsel 2 Chronicles 25:16. 2. Consultation; interchange of opinions. We took sweet counsel together. Psalms 55:14. 3. Deliberation; examination of consequences. They all confess that, in the working of that first cause, counsel is used, reason followed, and a way observed. 4. Prudence; deliberate opinion or judgment, or the faculty or habit of judging with caution. O how comely is the wisdom of old men, and understanding and counsel to men of honor. Ecclus. 25. The law shall perish from the priest, and counsel from the ancients. Ezekiel 7:26. 5. In a bad sense, evil advice or designs; art; machination. The counsel of the froward is carried headlong. Job 5:13. 6. Secrecy; the secrets entrusted in consultation; secret opinions or purposes. Let a man keep his own counsel 7. In a scriptural sense, purpose; design; will; decree. What thy counsel determined before to be done. Acts 4:28. To show the immutability of his counsel Hebrews 6:17. 8. Directions of Gods word. Thou shalt guide me by thy counsel Psalms 73:24. 9. The will of God or his truth and doctrines concerning the way of salvation. I have not shunned to declare to you all the counsel of God. Acts 20:27. 10. Those who give counsel in law; any counselor or advocate, or any number of counselors, barristers or sergeants; as the plaintiffs counsel or the defendants counsel. The attorney-general and solicitor-general are the kings counsel. In this sense, the word has no plural; but in the singular number, is applicable to one or more persons. – (verb transitive) [Latin] 1. To give advice or deliberate opinion to another for the government of his conduct; to advise. I counsel thee to buy of me gold tried in the fire. Revelations 3. 2. To exhort, warn, admonish, or instruct. We ought frequently to counsel our children against the vices of the age. They that will not be counseled, cannot be helped. 3. To advise or recommend; as, to counsel a crime. (–Webster’s 1828 Dictionary)

–=–

Note here that the word “god” and the word king, magistrate, prince, and pope are one in the same, explaining the repeated Bible references above. In other words, these counselors are placed throughout the syndicate’s institutions to specifically advocate for the will of the magistrates (gods) of the syndicate. This use of a religious concept in government and its frightening reality will be further defined below.

It is quite difficult to comprehend the fact that the University system is indeed packed full of attorneys (advocates) and counselors. After all, reasonably speaking, it would seem fairly odd that so many attorney/advocates should be required within a university, other than perhaps in the legal studies department. But this misconception stems from a total lack of comprehension regarding the true intent and purpose of the education system, and more to the point its important roles played out within the syndicate by these attorney advocates and counselors to maintain its illusion of legitimacy and authority. A simple online search uncovers the many attorney-based, often BAR membership required jobs available within the university structure. And because of this revelation, we receive a new understanding of just what this organized advocacy group we call the BAR Associations of the world really entails. For advocates are not simply lawyers, they are also accountants, financial officers, statisticians, councilors, teachers, expert witnesses, fellows, presidents, legislators, professionals, prefects, principles, etc…

Take for example this recent job posting for the well known medical university institution (syndication) of John’s Hopkins University:

“The Johns Hopkins University offers a one-year fellowship to a graduate of an accredited U.S. Law School. Commencing on or about October 16, 2012, the Fellow will spend one year working at the Office of the Vice President and General Counsel. The Vice President and General Counsel is the chief legal officer for the Johns Hopkins University. With a staff of nine attorneys, the Office of the Vice President and General Counsel provides legal representation and advice to the University and its trustees, officers, and employees acting on its behalf.”

“The office provides advice on a broad range of legal issues affecting the University, including labor and employment, government contracts and grants, litigation, investigations, faculty appointments, student issues, non-profit law, academic freedom, privacy, intellectual property, technology transfer, clinical practice, safety and environmental law, research and other compliance, health law and other legal issues relating to the School of Medicine, philanthropy, investments, real estate, international issues, business transactions, financing and tax matters. The attorneys prepare and negotiate contracts to which the University is a party. The office drafts and reviews proposed University policies. The office represents the University in litigation and before regulatory agencies. As in-house counsel, the office attorneys are in the unique position of being part of the goal-setting and strategic planning for the University. This role gives office attorneys the opportunity to do a significant amount of preventative lawyering, including running training programs and assisting with University compliance with federal, state, and local obligations. The Fellowship position provides recent law graduates an opportunity to work closely with all of the attorneys in the Office. The Fellow can expect to do legal research and prepare memoranda of law; review and draft agreements and procedures as well as litigation materials; and attend meetings related to the work assigned. The attorneys will review the Fellow’s work closely and meet with him or her to provide feedback. By providing exposure to the work and challenges of a university counselor’s office, the Fellowship is an excellent opportunity for those with an interest in the field of higher education law or any of the substantive areas in which we practice.”

SOURCE: http://attorneyjobmaryland.blogspot.com/2012/08/law-fellow-job-at-johns-hopkins.html#.VEDD_hAgtH4

–=–

Well gosh golly, I can’t imagine why so many attorney’s are needed at a school… but I can imagine the billable hours they must accumulate. I wonder why tuition is really as high as it is in most universities? Any ideas…?

And in point of fact, is the reader at all comfortable with the roles described here where attorneys are part of the “goal-setting and strategic planning for the University?

These advocates are the people you see on government panels as the invited guest speakers, often referred to as “experts” or “expert witnesses”. In other words, they are PAID WITNESSES! They did not actually witness anything regarding the case. They are there simply to promote and advocate for the syndicate to keep business as usual and to counter any actual evidence to their contrary. If the syndicate needs an expert witness, you can be assured it calls upon its roster of advocates within the education or other institutionalized (syndicated) systems. And any former employee of the education system that relied on grant money can attest that with the appointed position and research grants allotted to advocates, their positive advocacy for (and never against) the university system and all other parts of the syndicate involved must be maintained. So many good men and women with syndicated titles have lost their good name and standing within for simply criticizing the syndicate for what it really is – a confirmed fraud promoting institutionalized fraud. And they find out the hard way just how organized the fraud and crime really is only after losing everything the syndicate bestowed upon them in the first place, from research grants to reputation, while having been completely severed (black-balled) with regards to access to employment and syndication.

Advocates can appear in so many different ways, and are generally considered to be re-presentations of public opinion. They represent the people E Pluribus Unum style (from many opinions, one opinion), and through their official and legal capacity as attorneys they advocate for the criminal syndicate while pretending to be concerned parents, non-partial witnesses, and invited impartial experts. With countless cases of fraud and conspiracy decking the courts regarding doctors, judges, scientists, and other advocates of the syndicate, one would be hard-pressed to believe a single thing that comes out of the mouth of any “expert” presented by government or its syndicated corporate monopolies of medical, pharmaceutical, scientific, regulatory, legal, or financial advocacy.

For the court’s opinion is alas constituted in finality as the now official “public opinion”, creating even a monopoly on opinion itself through consensus. And the advocate as “expert witness” is key to ensuring the triumph of this syndicated opinion over any contrary outside notion.

OPINION, noun opin’yon. [Latin opinio, from opinor, to thing, Gr., Latin suppono.] 1. The judgment which the mind forms of any proposition, statement, theory or event, the truth or falsehood of which is supported by a degree of evidence that renders it probably, but does not produce absolute knowledge or certainty. It has been a received opinion that all matter is comprised in four elements. This opinion is proved by many discoveries to be false. From circumstances we form opinions respecting future events. OPINION is when the assent of the understanding is so far gained by evidence of probability, that it rather inclines to one persuasion than to another, yet not without a mixture of uncertainty or doubting. 2. The judgment or sentiments which the mind forms of persons or their qualities. We speak of a good opinion a favorable opinion a bad opinion a private opinion and public or general opinion etc. Friendship gives a man a peculiar right and claim to the good opinion of his friend. 3. Settled judgment or persuasion; as religious opinions; political opinion 4. Favorable judgment; estimation. (–Webster’s 1828 Dictionary)

–=–

To verbally or in writing opinion a subject is to magically transform through word magic often devious and misleading concepts into a tangible (written) official thing (legal law), making that concept accepted as normal no matter how ridiculous or despised it may be. Legal law can only be proven to exist via court opinion. The court transforms through opinion and thus final judgement falsities and lies into “facts” of law – institutionalized and syndicated bullshit, if you will. And the court is the representation of the public, as “the People” vs. everything and anyone. It thus creates opinion as a fiction of law. Yes, it exists only as a fiction. And a fiction only exists with belief and consent to its validity by the “public”, which is of course re-presented as “government”. Fiction is literally nothing more than a confirmed and accepted fraud (lie).

And government is a fiction…

As we can read, institutional thoughts need not be proven (as by scientific and medical research and through deliberation) to become what is then the “official” legal opinion of the syndicate, which then disseminates its own court-ruled opinion as “public opinion”. You could call this the doctrinal religion of the state, preached and taught by advocate profess-ors of the syndicate.

So many drugs that are labeled safe and effective by the regulatory portion of the syndicate called FDA are often years later revealed by the many maimed and harmed “patients” within the public or general population as extremely life-threatening, poisonous, cancer-causing, or as causing any number of other serious “side-effects” not listed in the syndicated pretrials, studies, and inserts of those drugs. And the FDA labels them as unsafe or ineffective only after many “patients” have been seriously damaged or died by them after initial approval, during the time period when the FDA’s official opinion (confirmed fraud) was that they were “safe and effective”.

This consensus of thought is often reached by committee, which generally consists of advocates (experts) paid by the syndicate to promote its lies. These advocates are everywhere, attorneys acting as agents of the syndicate while also playing the part of school teacher or professor, scientist or pharmacologist, expert or professional, etc.

And just what is a “committee”, Mr. Black, when considering that a syndicate is defined as a “university committee”?

Is it really just an advocacy group of attorneys disguised as caring professionals with the public’s best interest at heart?

(Hint: The syndicate is re-presented as public! It is the public!!!)

COMMITTEE – In practice. An assembly or board of persons to whom the consideration or management of any matter is committed or referred by some court. An individual or body to whom others have delegated or committed a particular duty, or who have taken on themselves to perform it in the expectation of their act being confirmed by the body they profess to represent or act for.  The term is especially applied to the person or persons who are invested, by order of the proper court, with the guardianship of the person and estate of one who has been adjudged a lunatic. In parliamentary law. A portion of a legislative body, comprising one or more members, who are charged with the duty of examining some matter specially referred to them by the house, or of deliberating upon it, and reporting to the house the result of their investigations or recommending a course of action. A committee may be appointed for one special occasion, or it may be appointed to deal with all matters which may be referred to it during a whole session or during the life of the body. In the latter case, it is called a “standing committee.” It is usually composed of a comparatively small number of members, but may include the whole house. (–Black’s 2nd Edition)

CONFIRM – To complete or establish that which was imperfect or uncertain; to ratify what has been done without authority or insufficiently. To confirm is to make firm that which was before infirm. (–Black’s 2nd Edition)

CONFIRMATION – A contract by which that which was infirm, imperfect, or subject to be avoided is made firm and unavoidable. A conveyance of an estate or right in esse, whereby a voidable estate is made sure and unavoidable, or whereby a particular estate is increased. (–Black’s 2nd Edition)

–=–

To be clear, a committee is another word for combination or confederacy (conspiracy). It is a committee of persons (secretly or openly representing the syndicate), all of whom work within the syndicate monopoly, while appearing to the public at large as a meeting of opposing sides. But in reality, a committee is mere formality to fool the viewing public (which contains no actual legal voice) into believing that the outcome of the committee’s opinion is in the best interest of the population (the many), and not in fact just for the continuity and profit of the syndicate (the one). This is like trusting the opinion of a bunch (combination) of oil company executives who meet in committee to decide the correct course to take for an oil spill. The syndicate has one goal as a corporation: PROFIT AND GAIN. To achieve its end, it must create a false sense of consensus through committee advocacy. So perhaps it is easier to comprehend the fraudulent nature of committee hearings in government if you just realize that every member stands to profit from within the syndicate from his or her bestowed title, and that the general population is ultimately just the taxpaying customer and consumer of the syndicate monopoly – the patients of the syndicate.

Ultimately, this government stage-play is just that – an act. The statute laws created are even called Acts. And of course everyone should know by now that actors in a play are nothing more than paid, professional liars. Nothing more, nothing less. Advocates engage in the art of lying. Their term of art is always double-speak. They lie as best they can simply to ensure that the act goes on in syndication without end (think: The Truman Show)…

PLAYER – noun One who plays in any game or sport. 1. An idler. 2. An actor of dramatic scenes; one whose occupation is to imitate characters on the stage. 3. A mimic. 4. One who performs on an instrument of music. 5. A gamester. 6. One that acts a part in a certain manner.

ACTOR – noun 1. He that acts or performs; an active agent. 2. He that represents a character or acts a part in a play; a stage player. 3. Among civilians, an advocate or proctor in civil courts or causes.

AGENT, adjective Acting; opposed to patient, or sustaining action; as, the body agent [Little used.]

AGENT, noun 1. An actor; one that exerts power, or has the power to act; as, a moral agent 2. An active power or cause; that which has the power to produce an effect; as, heat is a powerful agent 3. A substitute, deputy, or factor; one entrusted with the business of another; an attorney; a minister.

PERFORMER – noun One that performs any thing, particularly in an art; as a good performer on the violin or organ; a celebrated performer in comedy or tragedy, or in the circus.

PORTRAYER – noun One who paints, draws to the life or describes.

(–All definitions from Webster’s 1828 Dictionary)

–=–

https://i0.wp.com/lawrencecconnolly.com/wp-content/uploads/2014/10/masks.jpg
The true nature of every politician, as agents of the syndicate.

–=–
The Science Fiction of Truth:
Practice Makes Perfect
–=–

Doctors practice “medicine”.

Nurses practice “health”.

Lawyers practice “law”.

Bankers practice “banking”.

Preachers practice “religion”.

Teacher’s practice “education”.

Somewhere along the way tools such as the “scientific method” were trans-mutated into the institutions of their name, such as the institution of “science”. This created the doctrine of “science,” as if the tool of measuring and arriving at a scientific theory was ever meant to arrive at a final conclusion. This doctrine of written words is what is now called “science”. It does not teach the method as much as it teaches a syndicated preference of the perceived outcome of the method. Science is often taught as past discoveries that should not be challenged or improved upon, for new data is inconvenient to the established doctrinal models. This, of course, is nothing new. The science of Earth was that it was officially flat, until the doctrine was changed into the current description of round. It was heresy to claim anything else, for the religious government of science is of God, not method. Nothing has really changed. And the industry and syndicated education of science ignores the ethical lessons learned along the way in order to create a purely unscientific simulation of the scientific method, making it possible for the syndicate to legalize the most horrific of what it refers to as “scientific practices.”

And this model of taking an adjective or verb (to educate/scientific) and turning it into a noun/name/title (the institution of education and of science) was essential in the process of institutionalizing every uncontrollable action of man. For it is now illegal to help another in need without license from the state to practice that help as a profession. And in order to get that license, one must pay tuition and get credentialed by the syndicate so that one’s charity becomes an employable profit model for the corporate biosphere.

Notice the difference between the verb and noun (name) forms of the word practice below, from Webster’s 1828 Dictionary of the English Language:

PRAC’TICE, noun [Gr. to act, to do, to make; Eng. to brook, and broker; Latin fruor, for frugor or frucor, whence fructus, contracted into fruit; frequens.] 1. Frequent or customary actions; a succession of acts of a similar kind or in a like employment; as the practice of rising early or of dining late; the practice of reading a portion of Scripture morning and evening; the practice of making regular entries of accounts; the practice of virtue or vice. Habit is the effect of practice 2. Use; customary use. Obsolete words may be revived when they are more sounding or significant than those in practice 3. Dexterity acquired by use. [Unusual.] 4. Actual performance; distinguished from theory. There are two functions of the soul, contemplation and practice according to the general division of objects, some of which only entertain our speculations, others employ our actions. 5. Application of remedies; medical treatment of diseases. Two physicians may differ widely in their practice 6. Exercise of any profession; as the practice of law or of medicine; the practice of arms. 7. Frequent use; exercise for instruction or discipline. The troops are daily called out for practice 8. Skillful or artful management; dexterity in contrivance or the use of means; art; stratagem; artifice; usually in a bad sense. He sought to have that by practice which he could not by prayer. [This use of the word is genuine; from Latin experior. It is not a mistake as Johnson supposes. See the Verb.] 9. A rule in arithmetic, by which the operations of the general rules are abridged in use.

PRAC’TICE, verb transitive [From the noun. The orthography of the verb ought to be the same as of the noun; as in notice and to notice.] 1. To do or perform frequently, customarily or habitually; to perform by a succession of acts; as, to practice gaming; to practice fraud or deception; to practice the virtues of charity and beneficence; to practice hypocrisy. Isaiah 32:1. Many praise virtue who do not practice it. 2. To use or exercise any profession or art; as, to practice law or medicine; to practice gunnery or surveying. 3. To use or exercise for instruction, discipline or dexterity. [In this sense, the verb is usually intransitive.] 4. To commit; to perpetrate; as the horrors practiced at Wyoming. 5. To use; as a practiced road. [Unusual.]

PRAC’TICE, verb intransitive To perform certain acts frequently or customarily, either for instruction, profit, or amusement; as, to practice with the broad sword; to practice with the rifle. 1. To form a habit of acting in any manner. They shall practice how to live secure…  3. To try artifices. Others, by guilty artifice and arts – Of promis’d kindness, practic’d on our hearts. 4. To use evil arts or stratagems5. To use medical methods or experiments. I am little inclined to practice on others, and as little that others should practice on me. 6. To exercise any employment or profession. A physician has practiced many years with success.

ARTIFICE – noun [Latin artificium, from ars, art, and facio, to make.] 1. Stratagem; an artful or ingenious device, in a good or bad sense. In a bad sense, it corresponds with trick, or fraud. 2. Art; trade; skill acquired by science or practice.

–=–

Title is another word for artifice. These titles of doctor, attorney, teacher, etc. are nothing but terms of art, or artifices. They are fictional creations of the syndicate, used to separate the educated from the uneducated (indoctrinated vs. un-indoctrinated). But the education institution is not a verb but a noun, signifying the false mark of the beast through degree and diploma giving legal (not lawful) permission and license from the state to act under a title, and thus to act in the name (noun) of the state.

A license has one and only one meaning – to have permission to do an otherwise illegal act.

The syndicate versus the people…

Fiction versus reality…

VERSUS – (prep) mid-15c., in legal case names, denoting action of one party against another, from Latin versusturned toward or against,” from past participle of vertere (frequentative versare) “to turn, turn back, be turned, convert, transform, translate, be changed…German werden, Old English weorðanto become” (for sense, compare turn into); Welsh gwerthyd “spindle, distaff;” Old Irish frithagainst“).

–=–

Now you might comprehend the strange-but-true nature of science fiction elements for the scripted characters called “agents” in movies such as The Matrix and The Adjustment Bureau, the everyone-else-is-an-agent fiction of The Truman Show, and even the real life fictional agents of the syndicate; the attorney advocates called Internal Revenue Agents, Federal Bureau of Investigation agents, and so forth. Whether it be in the fiction of movies or within the fiction of law, these agents of the syndicated government always seem to show up when one of us gets out of line and somehow manages to break through the barriers set forth by the syndicate and its monopolies. If you can’t beat them, accuse them. Call them tax-avoiders or terrorists! Set them up with prostitutes or sabotage them with well-placed kiddy porn. Confine and confiscate all competition! Anything and everyone, or at least their reputation, may and must be sacrificed for the good of the syndicate. For the syndicate judges all, and the judgement is always pro-syndicate.

As portrayed in these fantasies, anyone can ultimately be an agent; an advocate undercover, acting and performing as one of the “patients” until his stage-call is exposed. All of the agents in the Truman show were of course paid employees who participated in the fraud and advocated for it because it paid them to act against their own interest and their moral objections.

The syndicate is the main employer!

The power of the purse…

It is important to note here that this syndicate was formed at the inception of the United States. And while it was not so technologically organized as it is today, the confederation and then constitution of this nation created a virtually unlimited potential for the central syndicate to grow and expand; a nest of red tape and protections from which the syndicate was berthed into America (the states). Each state of the “Union” of this confederation we call the United States was literally and by force required to confirm the fraudulent constitution of the United States central federal government in their own constitutions. States had no choice in the matter, for without confirmation of the supreme and sovereign authority of the central federal syndicate, they would not be allowed to even become states of that union. You can verify this in your own state constitution and enabling acts. For states are nothing more than acts of congress, confirmed by the president of the syndicate.

The act of confirmation is more simply defined as the conveyance of the right of estate.

CONVEYTo pass or transmit the title to property from one to another; to transfer property or the title to property by deed or instrument under seal. To convey real estate is, by an appropriate instrument, to transfer the legal title to it from the present owner to another. Convey relates properly to the disposition of real property, not to personal. (–Black’s 2nd Edition)

CONVEYANCE – In pleading. Introduction or inducement. In real property law. The transfer of the title of land from one person or class of persons to another. An instrument in writing under seal, (anciently termed an “assurance,”) by which some estate or interest in lands is transferred from one person to another; such as a deed, mortgage, etc. Conveyance includes every instrument in writing by which any estate or interest in real estate is created, aliened, mortgaged, or assigned, or by which the title to any real estate may be affected in law or equity, except last wills and testaments, leases for a term not exceeding three years, and executory contracts for the sale or purchase of lands. (–Black’s 2nd Edition)

–=–

As hard as it is to admit and as painful as it may be perceived to the patriotic reader, the states had to confirm the fraud (confederation) of the central municipality of Washington D.C. as being the supreme power. No state can exist in the United States (union) without this confirmation regarding the sovereignty of the United States corporation and its constitution (debt compact). There is no right of succession within states, as the Civil war proved without doubt and as each state constitution now plainly instructs, naming states as inseparable from the union. To confirm some fictional thing like the United States is to confirm that particular fraud as the “law of the land”. While fraud is avoidable, a confirmed fraud is in turn unavoidable.

A constitution is a compact (contract) and consent to evil (fiction). The fraud becomes the government, just as the de facto United States became the federation, and thus the formation of the syndicate and its stated authority is also unavoidable as it exists only under the government’s perceived and syndicated authority. Confirmation is the action of making or turning what is unlawful and thus avoidable into a legally permissible and thus unavoidable fraud by consensual contract. The states of the union, therefore, as post-civil war corporate creations (admissions) of the union, are also mere fictional frauds, held together by nothing more than the implied consent of the inhabitants of each state – whom of course have been given a healthy dose of complete and total ignorance of these facts by the syndicate and its forced government education system, where it subjects its subjects to “history” indoctrination.

Centralized education was a requirement in the constitution of all states, not a choice.

Advocates (attorneys) do well as partners in the fraud and crime, for their whole job and lifestyle is one with a mere fictional title of limited nobility promoting the lie.

Dissenters are allowed to speak in controlled unofficial forums, providing the illusion of freedom of speech and political participation but with no actual voice (authority). An activist may never speak or present in committee or with official opinion in any seriously considered capacity. The minority always fails, while the ignorant majority lives in its own shit-pile of consequence.

E Pluribus Unum is a powerful tool and the foundational creed of the United States’ organized criminal syndicate. And so it was that the syndicate was incrementally formed and evolved over time, centralizing all power by confirming the corporate institutions and private associations that oversee all things without exception from within this wicked combination.

–=–
Defining The Syndicate
–=–

We must now dig further to discover that the purpose of education is not to educate, but to syndicate false information that ensures the syndicates’ ability to continue in perpetuity to be the syndication vehicle of information and regulations. In short, the syndicate exists only to perpetuate its own existence, and for no other purpose, rewarding its advocates along the way.

When something cannot be decided in committee, the syndicate may refer it to a circus parlor trick called a “conference”. A conference is simply a congress of syndicate advocates drawn together in fraud to reach a predetermined consensus.

CONFERENCEA meeting of several persons for deliberation, for the interchange of opinion, or for the removal of differences or disputes. Thus, a meeting between a counsel and solicitor to advise on the cause of their client. In the practice of legislative bodies, when the two houses cannot agree upon a pending measure, each appoints a committee of “conference,” and the committees meet and consult together for the purpose of removing differences, harmonizing conflicting views, and arranging a compromise which will be accepted by both houses.

–=–

Here, in conference, a bunch of syndicate representatives (advocates) congregate and use word magic and trickery to “remove differences of opinion or disputes” and to advocate the “harmonizing of conflicting views” that the real public might express through non-syndicated activism – the people’s individual voices that are virtually never actually heard, and are instead worked around. Thus, through conference and via dispute resolution, an official sounding deliberation is conferred by the government regulatory bodies of the syndicate so that its profitable corporations may prosper in combinations never comprehended or commissioned by its patients – the public at large.

The voices of decent and reason are squashed in conference and committee.

E Pluribus Unum

Some call this the forming of “consensus”. Others refer to it as the utilization of the Delphi technique. Whatever you call it, the syndicate is nothing if not the great decider.

Anciently, this same system of Delphic decisions of the gods (magistrates) were instituted by the church, which was and still is the state without separation. For legislation is simply the religious civil doctrine of the state – the acts of a 24 hour a day stage-play.

SYNOD – A meeting or assembly of ecclesiastical persons concerning religion; being the same thing, in Greek, as convocation in Latin. There are four kinds: (1) A general or universal synod or council, where bishops of all nations meet; (2) a national synod of the clergy of one nation only; (3) a provincial synod, where ecclesiastical persons of a province only assemble, being now what is called the “convocation;” (4) a diocesan synod, of those of one diocese. A synod in Scotland is composed of three or more presbyteries.

SYNODAL – A tribute or payment in money paid to the bishop or archdeacon by the inferior clergy, at the Easter visitation.

SYNODALES TESTES – Synods-men (corrupted into sidesmen) were the urban and rural deans, now the church-wardens.

–=–

And from these committees of the syndicate come its offspring, called the syllabus, for which the education system and its advocate “teachers” must follow as professor of that instruction. The syllabus is the end result of syllogism, which through committee and conference creates also a monopoly on logic, reason, and debate, so that the curriculum taught in schools and universities is the eventuality of the sole proprietary creation and fiction of the syndicate. The syllabus offers no freedom of thought or dissenting viewpoints, for it represents the opinion of the syndicate; of the public court.

SYLLABUS – A head-note; a note prefixed to the report of an adjudged case, containing an epitome or brief statement of the rulings of the court upon the point or points decided in the case.

SYLLOGISM – In logic. The full logical form of a single argument. It consists of three propositions, (two premises and the conclusion,) and these contain three terms, of which the two occurring in the conclusion are brought together in the premises by being referred to a common class.

SYNGRAPH – The name given by the canonists to deeds of which both parts were written on the same piece of parchment, with some word or letters of the alphabet written between them, through which the parchment was cut in such a manner as to leave half the word on one~part and half on the other. It thus corresponded to the chirograph or indenture of the common law. A deed or other written instrument under the hand and seal of all the parties.

SYNCOPARETo cut short, or pronounce things so as not to be understood.

–=–

Ultimately, the purpose of the syndicate is a simple one, though it requires the unprecedented organization of fraud and crime that we have thus-far revealed. Quite simply, the end goal is only the acquirement of total (tacitly implied) consent. And this is easiest achieved through false consensus: an ingenious but ultimately unreal state of manufactured consent through the founding principle of E Pluribus Unum

The etymology of these words are as follows:

CONSENSUAL (adj.) – 1754, “having to do with consent,” from stem of Latin consensus (see consensus) + -al (1). Meaning “by consent” is attested from 1800.

CONSENSUS (adj.) from 1854 as a term in physiology; 1861 of persons; from Latin consensusagreement, accord,” past participle of consentire (see consent). There is an isolated instance of the word from 1633.

CONSENT (v.) – from early 13c. from Old French consentir (12c.) “agree, comply,” from Latin consentirefeel together,” from com-with” (see com-) + sentireto feel” (see sense (n.)). “Feeling together,” hence, “agreeing, giving permission,” apparently a sense evolution that took place in French before the word reached English. Related: Consented; consenting. (noun.) c.1300, “approval,” also “agreement in sentiment, harmony,” from Old French consente, from consentir (see consent (v.)). Age of consent is attested from 1809.

–=–

Black’s Law 2nd edition reveals how we in the general population are tricked into said harmonious group agreement and false consensus through the use of implied consent, as doled out by the committees, conferences, and consensus opinions of the syndicate.

CONSENTA concurrence of wills. Express consent is that directly given, either lira voce (in voice) or in writing. Implied consent is that manifested by signs, actions, or facts, or by inaction or silence, which raise a presumption that the consent has been given. Consent in an act of reason, accompanied with deliberation, the mind weighing as in a balance the good or evil on each side.

–=–

With the implied consent of the entire population unum, Black’s 2nd explains what are the direct implications of this uninformed (unacknowledged) consent and how this falsely formed consensus creates the  implied authority of dictatorship:

IMPLIED POWERS – This term applies to the authority that a public official has due to the nature of their duties.

IMPLIED AUTHORITY – A term given to the power that an agent has or the authority under certain circumstances.

GENERALLY IMPLIEDTypical understanding or definition in an industry, organization, or trade of a common, customary practice, or meaning of a term.

OBLIGATION IMPLIED – This is the term given to an obligation that is inferred to be a duty due to the nature of the agreement.

IMPLIED ASSENT – Applied to the assent that is agreed to but has not been stated expressly.

IMPLIED CONTRACT – An agreement that is agreed upon but has not been put into words.

IMPLIED AGREEMENT – One inferred from the acts or conduct of the parties, instead of being expressed by them in written or spoken words; one inferred by the law where the conduct of the parties with reference to the subject-matter is such as to induce the belief that they intended to do that which their acts indicate they have done.

–=–

In short, we have an implied government, which uses an implied consent to an implied constitution to command implied authority and implied assent to its own statutes and opinions – all because of your own implied agreement (silence) to all of these implications. Your silence and lack of action is your tacit consent. This double-speak of ways to induce a false sense of agreement and thus consensus, is all based on one very fragile concept – faith. The syndicate can only continue in perpetuity if it has the belief of the people it dominates, suggesting its permissive and consensual authority of those same subjected and dominated people, and implying that the syndicated de facto government has legitimacy. Amazingly, government admits openly that it indeed is not legitimate – that it is a de facto (illegitimate/only by force) fiction of law. This is quite verifiable on your own. And yet the voter turn out shows very well that the religion of the state and its sovereignty doctrine reigns supreme.

There’s just one little problem with that word sovereignty. And thanks to the syndicate, the “educated” masses worship its meaning incorrectly and without understanding of its ultimate implied authority…

SOVEREIGN, adjective suv’eran. [We retain this babarous orthography from the Norman sovereign. The true spelling would be suveran from the Latin supernes, superus.] 1. Supreme in power; possessing supreme dominion; as a sovereign ruler of the universe. 2. Supreme; superior to all others; chief. God is the sovereign good of all who love and obey him. 3. Supremely efficacious; superior to all others; predominant; effectual; as a sovereign remedy. 4. Supreme; pertaining to the first magistrate of a nation; as sovereign authority. – (noun) suv’eran. 1. A supreme lord or ruler; one who possesses the highest authority without control. Some earthly princes, kings and emperors are sovereigns in their dominions. 2. A supreme magistrate; a king. 3. A gold coin of England, value (of) $4.44 (–Webster’s 1828 Dictionary)

MAG’ISTRATE, noun [Latin magistratus, from magister, master; magis, major, and ster, Teutonic steora, a director; steoran, to steer; the principal director.] A public civil officer, invested with the executive government or some branch of it. In this sense, a king is the highest or first magistrate as is the President of the United States. But the word is more particularly applied to subordinate officers, as governors, intendants, prefects, mayors, justices of the peace, and the like. The magistrate must have his reverence; the laws their authority. (–Webster’s 1828 Dictionary)

–=–

Hmm… so our president, governors, mayors, and judges are all magistrates, which translates to masters. And all these fall under the notion of sovereignty as supreme rulers without control.

Dare we examine further the etymology of these words…?

In fact, isn’t to declare something supreme and sovereign actually to deify that thing as a god?

Surely not…

Well, first, how does Webster’s 1828 Dictionary define the word “god”?

GOD, noun 1. The Supreme Being; Jehovah; the eternal and infinite spirit, the creator, and the sovereign of the universe. GOD is a spirit; and they that worship him, must worship him in spirit and in truth. John 4:24. 2. A false god; a heathen deity; an idol. Fear not the gods of the Amorites. Judges 6:10. 3. A prince; a ruler; a magistrate or judge; an angel. 4. Any person or thing exalted too much in estimation, or deified and honored as the chief good. Whose god is their belly. Philippians 3:19. GOD, verb transitive To deify.

–=–

Uh-oh. This isn’t looking good… it seems Webster just hit the nail painfully on the head. Whereas he defines a magistrate as a president, governor, mayor, or judge, at the same time he defines a god as a magistrate. Of course the meaning is of a false god in idol worship, honored by a completely and deliberately dumbed down population under implied god-headedness. And so thanks to the combined efforts of the syndicate, the people don’t even know they are worshiping and supporting heathen false gods as their government officials with supreme and sovereign authority over them. This alone is proof of the power of the syndicate and its system of re-education.

It was Voltaire who said, “I want my lawyer, my tailor, my servants, even my wife to believe in God, because it means that I shall be cheated and robbed and cuckolded less often. … If God did not exist, it would be necessary to invent him.”

Well, the gods are re-invented every election cycle!

Etymologically speaking, we can see how this invention of a fictional state-god actually happened, and how it is used to make “patients” out of otherwise God-fearing men, who bend on one knee to the god that is government and its magistrates…

DEIFY – (v.)  mid-14c., from Old French deifier (13c.), from Late Latin deificare, from deificus “making godlike,” from Latin deus “god” (see Zeus) + -ficare, from facere “to make, to do” (see factitious). Related: Deified; deifying.

DEITY – (n.) c.1300, “divine nature;” late 14c., “a god,” from Old French deité, from Late Latin deitatem (nominative deitas) “divine nature,” coined by Augustine from Latin deus “god,” from PIE *deiwos (see Zeus).

GOD – (n.) Old English god “supreme being, deity; the Christian God; image of a god; godlike person,” from Proto-Germanic *guthan (cognates: Old Saxon, Old Frisian, Dutch god, Old High German got, German Gott, Old Norse guð, Gothic guþ), from PIE *ghut- “that which is invoked” (cognates: Old Church Slavonic zovo “to call,” Sanskrit huta- “invoked,” an epithet of Indra), from root *gheu(e)- “to call, invoke.”

MAGISTRATE – (n.) late 14c., “civil officer in charge of administering laws,” from Old French magistrat, from Latin magistratus “a magistrate, public functionary,” originally “magisterial rank or office,” from magistrare “serve as a magistrate,” from magister “chief, director” (see master). Related: Magistracy.

MASTER – (n.) late Old English mægester “one having control or authority,” from Latin magister (n.) “chief, head, director, teacher” (source of Old French maistre, French maître, Spanish and Italian maestro, Portuguese mestre, Dutch meester, German Meister), contrastive adjective (“he who is greater“) from magis (adv.) “more,”

FACTITIOUS – (adj.) 1640s, “made by or resulting from art, artificial,” from Latin factitius “artificial,” from factus “elaborate, artistic,” past participle adjective from facere “do” (source of French faire, Spanish hacer), from PIE root *dhe- “to put, to do” (cognates: Sanskrit dadhati “puts, places;” Avestan dadaiti “he puts;” Old Persian ada “he made;” Hittite dai- “to place;” Greek tithenai “to put, set, place;” Lithuanian deti “to put;” Polish dziać się “to be happening;” Russian delat’ “to do;” Old High German tuon, German tun, Old Saxon, Old English don “to do;” Old Frisian dua, Old Swedish duon, Gothic gadeths “a doing;” Old Norse dalidun “they did”). Related: Factitiously; factitiousness.

–=–

“Much in you is still man, and much in you is not yet man,
but a shapeless pigmy that walks asleep in the mist searching for its own awakening.”

–Kahlil Gibran, “The Prophet”

–=–

It is perhaps best to reveal the origin and etymology of such words rather than utilizing dumbed-down definitions from modern dictionaries offered to the students of that very system. For ironically, education is one word they don’t teach you in school!!!

To truly understand the purpose of education, we must cross over to and temporarily attempt to empathize with the elitist dark side of the syndicate so as to view this subject through the warped disposition of our controllers and handlers. Perhaps a better question than our initial title here would be:

What kind of education would a slave-master wish to impart upon his slaves, knowing that they can be made to love and yet perceive not the nature of their enslavement?

–=–
Programming The Matrix:
Examining The Language Code Of The Syndicate
–=–

And so we arrive back to our original question… How do you define what education really is?

Etymology, the study of the origin of words (http://etymonline.com), will best help us in our lofty endeavor:

EDUCATION (n.) – From the 1530s, “childrearing,” also “the training of animals,” from Middle French education (14c.) and directly from Latin educationem (nominative educatio) “a rearing, training,” noun of action from past participle stem of educare (see educate). Originally of instruction in social codes and manners; meaning “systematic schooling and training for work” is from 1610s.

–=–

Ok then… the training of animals it is. But who and what exactly do these elitist syndicate-men consider to be animals?

ANIMALISM (n.) – “the doctrine that man is a mere animal,” 1857, from animal + ism. Earlier, “exercise of animal faculties; physical exercise” (1831).

ANIMAL (n.) – From early 14c. (but rare before c.1600, and not in KJV, 1611), “any living creature” (including humans), from Latin animaleliving being, being which breathes,” neuter of animalisanimate, living; of the air,” from animabreath, soul; a current of air” (see animus, and compare deer). Drove out the older beast in common usage. Used of brutish humans from 1580s.

BEAST (n.) – c.1200, from Old French besteanimal, wild beast,” figuratively “fool, idiot” (11c., Modern French bête), from Vulgar Latin *besta, from Latin bestiabeast, wild animal,” of unknown origin. Used to translate Latin animal. Replaced Old English deor (see deer) as the generic word for “wild creature,” only to be ousted 16c. by animal. Of persons felt to be animal-like in various senses from early 13c. Of the figure in the Christian apocalypse story from late 14c.

ZOON (n.) – “animal form containing all elements of a typical organism of its group,” 1864, from Greek zoion “animal” (see zoo-).

POLITICAL (adj.) – From the 1550s, “pertaining to a polity, civil affairs, or government;” from Latin politicusof citizens or the state” (see politic (adj.)) + -al (1). Meaning “taking sides in party politics” (usually pejorative) is from 1749. Political prisoner first recorded 1860; political science is from 1779 (first attested in Hume). Political animal translates Greek politikon zoon (Aristotle, “Politics,” I.ii.9) “an animal intended to live in a city; a social animal.”

ZOO – word-forming element meaning “animal, living being,” from comb. form of Greek zoionan animal,” literally “a living being,” from PIE root *gwei-to live, life” (source also of Greek bioslife,” Old English cwiculiving;” see bio-).

–=–

The best of students are often called the “teacher’s pet”. Is this an endearment or merely the sign of an animal with an ultra-trainable mentality?

PET – “tamed animal,” originally in Scottish and northern England dialect (and exclusively so until mid-18c.), of unknown origin. Sense of  “indulged child” (c.1500) is recorded slightly earlier than that of “animal kept as a favorite” (1530s), but the latter may be the primary meaning. Probably associated with or influenced by petty . As a term of endearment by 1849. Teacher’s pet is attested from 1890.

–=–

But wait a minute! Education creates smart people does it not?

In actuality, the population is so dumbed down that it doesn’t even know the meaning of that word!

SMART – (n.) “sharp pain,” c.1200, from sharp (adj.). Cognate with Middle Dutch smerte, Dutch smart, Old High German smerzo, German Schmerzpain.”

SMART – (adj.) From late Old English smeartpainful, severe, stinging; causing a sharp pain,” related to smeortan (see smart (v.)). Meaning “executed with force and vigor” is from c.1300. Meaning “quick, active, clever” is attested from c.1300, from the notion of “cutting” wit, words, etc., or else “keen in bargaining.” Meaning “trim in attire” first attested 1718, “ascending from the kitchen to the drawing-room c.1880” [Weekley]. For sense evolution, compare sharp (adj.). In reference to devices, the sense of “behaving as though guided by intelligence” (as in smart bomb) first attested 1972. Smarts “good sense, intelligence,” is first recorded 1968. Smart cookie is from 1948.

SMARTEN – (v.) “to make smart, to spruce up, to improve appearance,” 1786, from smart (adj.) in its sense of “spruce, trim” + -en (1). Related: Smartened; smartening.

–=–

Education places more importance on dress attire and proper artful etiquette than knowledge. It’s sole purpose is to produce trained animals that have the appearance of professionalism, that in reality have no foundational legitimacy to profess anything at all.

The syndicate doesn’t just employ advocates, it absorbs them into its matrix. Admittance isn’t just acceptance, it is the creation of a new creature; the bestowing of flattering title and privilege through registration, education, and finally subscription into the establishment. One’s entire lifestyle must change to fit the world view of their chosen profession. The syndicate becomes the surrogate mother of all its conscripted advocates, whom in turn are vested in the syndicate for their very surrogate existence – totally dependent on its continuity in order to prove their own credentials. They are literally by necessity of their titles plugged-in to the matrix…

For the word matrix is not some science fiction creation. It is in reality the creation of fiction. A matrix is the birth origination of an artificial person into the syndicate.

MATRIX – From late 14c., “uterus, womb,” from Old French matrice “womb, uterus,” from Latin matrix (genitive matricis) “pregnant animal,” in Late Latin “womb,” also “source, origin,” from mater (genitive matris) “mother” (see mother (n.1)). Sense of “place or medium where something is developed” is first recorded 1550s; sense of “embedding or enclosing mass” first recorded 1640s. Logical sense of “array of possible combinations of truth-values” is attested from 1914. As a verb from 1951.

MATRIXIn civil law, the protocol or first draft of a legal instrument, from which all copies must be taken. (Downing v. Diaz, 80 Tex. 436, 16 S.W. 53.)

MATRIXWomb. A place where anything is generated or formed. (Samuel Johnson’s Dictionary 1755)

–=–

MATRICULATE – From the 1570s, “to admit a student to a college by enrolling his name on the register,” from Late Latin matriculatus, past participle of matriculareto register,” from Latin matriculapublic register,” diminutive of matrix (genitive matricis) “list, roll,” also “sources, womb” (see matrix).

ADMIT – (v.) From late 14c., “let in,” from Latin admittereto allow to enter, let in, let come, give access,” from ad- “to” (see ad-) + mittere “let go, send” (see mission). Sense of “to concede as valid or true” is first recorded early 15c. Related: Admitted; Admitting.

CONSCRIPTION – From late 14c., “a putting in writing,” from Middle French conscription, from Latin conscriptionem (nominative conscriptio) “a drawing up of a list, enrollment, a levying of soldiers,” from conscribereto enroll,” from com- “with” (see com-) + scribereto write” (see script (n.)). Meaning “enlistment of soldiers” is from 1520s; the sense “compulsory enlistment for military service” (1800) is traceable to the French Republic act of Sept. 5, 1798. Technically, a conscription is the enrollment of a fixed number by lot, with options of providing a substitute.

TAX – c.1300, “impose a tax on,” from Old French taxer “impose a tax” (13c.) and directly from Latin taxareevaluate, estimate, assess, handle,” also “censure, charge,” probably a frequentative form of tangereto touch” (see tangent (adj.)). Sense of “to burden, put a strain on” first recorded early 14c.; that of “censure, reprove” is from 1560s. Its use in Luke ii for Greek apographeinto enter on a list, enroll” is due to Tyndale. Related: Taxed; taxing.

ENROLLMENT – (n.) also enrolment, mid-15c., “act of enrolling,” from Anglo-French enrollement, from Middle French enrollement, from Old French enrollerrecord in a register” (see enroll). Meaning “total number enrolled” is from 1859, American English.

ENROLL – From mid-14c. (transitive), from Old French enrollerrecord in a register, write in a roll” (13c., Modern French enrôler), from en-make, put in” (see en- (1)) + rolle (see roll (n.)). Related: Enrolled; enrolling.

ROLL – From early 13c., “rolled-up piece of parchment or paper” (especially one inscribed with an official record), from Old French rolledocument, parchment scroll, decree” (12c.), from Medieval Latin rotulusa roll of paper” (source also of Spanish rollo, Italian ruollo), from Latin rotulasmall wheel,” diminutive of rota “wheel” (see rotary). Meaning “a register, list, catalogue” is from late 14c., common from c.1800…

REGISTER  (v1)- late 14c. (transitive), “enter in a listing,” from Old French registrernote down, include” (13c.) and directly from Medieval Latin registrare, from registrum (see register (n.)). Intransitive sense, of instruments, from 1797; of persons and feelings, “make an impression,” from 1901. Meaning “to enter one’s name in a list” for some purpose is from 1940. Related: Registered; registering. Registered nurse attested from 1879.

REGISTER – (n.1) late 14c., from Old French registre (13c.) and directly from Medieval Latin registrum, alteration of Late Latin regestalist, matters recorded,” noun use of Latin regesta, neuter plural of regestus, past participle of regerereto record; retort,” literally “to carry back, bring back” from re- “back” (see re-) + gererecarry, bear” (see gest). Also borrowed in Dutch, German, Swedish, Danish. Some senses influenced by association with Latin regereto rule.” Meaning in printing, “exact alignment of presswork” is from 1680s… Sense “device by which data is automatically recorded” is 1830, from the verb; hence Cash register (1875).

REGISTER – (n.2) “assistant court officer in administrative or routine function,” 1530s, now chiefly U.S., alteration of registrar (q.v) due to influence of register.

ACTUARY – (n.) 1550s, “registrar, clerk,” from Latin actuariuscopyist, account-keeper,” from actuspublic business” (see act (n.)). Modern insurance office meaning first recorded 1849.

CATALOGUE – (n) from the early 15c., from Old French cataloguelist, index” (14c.), and directly from Late Latin catalogus, from Greek katalogosa list, register, enrollment” (such as the katalogos neon, the “catalogue of ships” in the “Iliad”), from katadown; completely” (see cata-) + legeinto say, count” (see lecture (n.)).

SUBSCRIBE – (v.) From the early 15c., “to sign at the bottom of a document,” from Latin subscriberewrite, write underneath, sign one’s name; register,” also figuratively “assent, agree to, approve,” from subunderneath” (see sub-) + scriberewrite” (see script (n.)). The meaning “give one’s consent” (by subscribing one’s name) first recorded mid-15c.; that of “contribute money to” 1630s; and that of “become a regular buyer of a publication” 1711, all originally literal. Related: Subscribed; subscribing.

SIGNATURE – (n.) 1530s, a kind of document in Scottish law, from Middle French signature (16c.) or directly from Medieval Latin signaturasignature, a rescript,” in classical Latin “the matrix of a seal,” from signatus, past participle of signareto mark with a stamp, sign” (see sign (v.)).  Meaning “one’s own name written in one’s own hand” is from 1570s, replacing sign-manual (early 15c.) in this sense… Meaning “a distinguishing mark of any kind” is from 1620s.

ESTABLISHMENT – From the late 15c., “settled arrangement,” also “income, property,” from establish + -ment. Meaning “established church” is from 1731; Sense of “place of business” is from 1832. Meaning “social matrix of ruling people and institutions” is attested occasionally from 1923, consistently from 1955. The connection of senses in the Latin word seems to be via confusion of Greek metra “womb” (from metermother;” see mother (n.1)) and an identical but different Greek word metra meaning “register, lot” (see meter (n.2)). Evidently Latin matrix was used to translate both, though it originally shared meaning with only one. Related: Matriculated; matriculating.

–=–

Of course we must train our young to be patriotic, thus defending the slave-master’s territory as if it were our own, preserving continuity of the syndicate that makes us all its unwitting patients. And so the education system has institutionalized and instilled in its patients (students), as animals, a strict territorial protectionism. Each school day begins with the saying of an enchantment pledge to the sovereign god of government via its symbol of authority, the United States war flag. I pledge allegiance, to the flag…

TERRITORIAL (adj.) – From the 1620s, “of or pertaining to a territory,” from Late Latin territorialis, from territorium (see territory). In reference to British regiments, from 1881. In reference to an area defended by an animal, from 1920. Territorial waters is from 1841. Territorial army “British home defense” is from 1908. Territorial imperativeanimal need to claim and defend territory is from 1966.

–=–

Territory and jurisdiction go hand in hand. A flattering title in the matrix of the syndicate only exists in that fictional jurisdiction, not in reality. Therefore the territorial imperative must be instilled into each generation in order to legitimize the syndicate. The birth certificate is the matrix, the initial legal document, which creates the bond and surety of the surname to the given name. Only upon that legal surname can the syndicate bestow titles and credentials – upon the artificial person (name).

Perhaps we are all victims here? Perhaps we have all received the mental mark of the government beast without contemplation, enchanted by our very own pledge of allegiance to a complete fiction. Perhaps this represents our being branded like cattle, as chattel within invisible paper borders educated to love our servitude and to hate true freedom…

MARK (n.) – “Trace, impression,” Old English mearc (West Saxon), merc (Mercian) “boundary, sign, limit, mark,” from Proto-Germanic *marko (cognates: Old Norse merki “boundary, sign,” mörk “forest,” which often marked a frontier; Old Frisian merke, Gothic marka “boundary, frontier,” Dutch merk “mark, brand,” German Mark “boundary, boundary land”), from PIE *merg- “edge, boundary, border” (cognates: Latin margo “margin;” Avestan mareza- “border,” Old Irish mruig, Irish bruig “borderland,” Welsh brodistrict“).  The primary sense is probably “boundary,” which had evolved by Old English through “sign of a boundary,” through “sign in general,” then to “impression or trace forming a sign.” Meaning “any visible trace or impression” first recorded c.1200. Sense of “line drawn to indicate starting point of a race” (as in on your marks …) first attested 1887. The Middle English sense of “target” (c.1200) is the notion in marksman and slang sense “victim of a swindle” (1883). The notion of “sign, token” is behind the meaning “numerical award given by a teacher” (1829). Influenced by Scandinavian cognates.

VICTIM (n.) – Late 15c., “living creature killed and offered as a sacrifice to a deity or supernatural power,” from Latin victimaperson or animal killed as a sacrifice.” Perhaps distantly connected to Old English wigidol,” Gothic weihs “holy,” German weihenconsecrate” (compare Weihnachten “Christmas”) on notion of “a consecrated animal.” Sense of “person who is hurt, tortured, or killed by another” is recorded from 1650s; meaning “person oppressed by some power or situation” is from 1718. Weaker sense of “person taken advantage of” is recorded from 1781.

–=–

And just where is it that we are collectively taken advantage of, receiving the mark of work training to ensure our future labor capacity to be used in commercial activities as employees of the human trafficking (commerce) syndicate?

SCHOOL (n.) – “Place of instruction,” Old English scol, from Latin scholaintermission of work, leisure for learning; learned conversation, debate; lecture; meeting place for teachers and students, place of instruction; disciples of a teacher, body of followers, sect,” from Greek skhole “spare time, leisure, rest ease; idleness; that in which leisure is employed; learned discussion;” also “a place for lectures, school;” originally “a holding back, a keeping clear,” from skheinto get” (from PIE root *segh-to hold, hold in one’s power, to have;” see scheme (n.)) + -ole by analogy with bole “a throw,” stole “outfit,” etc. The original notion is “leisure,” which passed to “otiose discussion” (in Athens or Rome the favorite or proper use for free time), then “place for such discussion.” The Latin word was widely borrowed (Old French escole, French école, Spanish escuela, Italian scuola, Old High German scuola, German Schule, Swedish skola, Gaelic sgiol, Welsh ysgol, Russian shkola). Translated in Old English as larhus, literally “lore house,” but this seems to have been a glossary word only. Meaning “students attending a school” in English is attested from c.1300; sense of “school building” is first recorded 1590s. Sense of “people united by a general similarity of principles and methods” is from 1610s; hence school of thought (1864). School of hard knocks “rough experience in life” is recorded from 1912 (in George Ade); to tell tales out of schoolbetray damaging secrets” is from 1540s. School bus is from 1908. School days is from 1590s. School board from 1870.

SCHEME (n.) – From the 1550s, “figure of speech,” from Medieval Latin schemashape, figure, form, appearance; figure of speech; posture in dancing,” from Greek skhema (genitive skhematos) “figure, appearance, the nature of a thing,” related to skheinto get,” and ekheinto have,” from PIE root *segh-to hold, to hold in one’s power, to have” (cognates: Sanskrit sahatehe masters, overcomes,” sahahpower, victory;” Avestan hazah “power, victory;” Greek ekheinto have, hold;” Gothic sigis, Old High German sigu, Old Norse sigr, Old English sigevictory“). The sense “program of action” first is attested 1640s. Unfavorable overtones (selfish, devious) began to creep in early 18c. Meaning “complex unity of coordinated component elements” is from 1736. Color scheme is attested from 1884. – (v.) – to “devise a scheme,” 1767 (earlier “reduce to a scheme,” 1716), from scheme (n.). Related: Schemed; scheming.

–=–

To put this into terms of common understanding, schools now teach students how to learn to be a part of the end result of the scheme of education, how to be good little victims and patients, how to fit into the syndicate, and how to bear (carry) the mark and impression of unwarranted authority and oppression (a degree of crime) over apparently less “educated” persons. For an official education is not knowledge, merely learned behavior. By learning to believe in the territorial imperative – as trained animals – the pedagogical sophist (graduate with a degree) then intellectually feels the need to claim and defend the territorial scheme as a forceful government jurisdiction. For without a territory that recognizes the degree of crime (diploma) bestowed upon his or her name, the sophist would never succeed in his selfish claim of master and graduate, nor have title and status over others. The graduate is thus an automatic advocate of the syndicate. For without the authority of the University institution, his or her credentials (diploma) would be worthless.

–=–
Degrees Of Crime
–=–

The average ego-centric person is very proud of their little piece of parchment that states the degree to which they have been “educated”. The conceptual actualization of the credentialist model through education allows for a criminal syndicate based on mere export of specifically trained animals, where the worst crimes against humanity are imagined and perpetrated. This ranking system of schools and universities when brought into the light reveals origins much more imaginative than the best science fictions available. Basing its ladder of approval and license via the issuance of a state-sanctioned diploma, the true nature of this system boils down to mere monopolistic syndicalism.

To comprehend what the education system truly represents, we must first discover where these words originated and how they describe just what an “educated” man is. Receiving your high school, college, and university diploma has been engrained into our societal norm as one of the great achievements of a young person’s life. But what is the etymology of that word?

It is interesting to note that the etymology of the word degree, referring to the movement or position of some thing in relation to its master:

DEGREE (n.)  “a grade of crime“, early 13c., from Old French degré (12c.) “a step (of a stair), pace, degree (of relationship), academic degree; rank, status, position,” said to be from Vulgar Latin *degradusa step,” from Late Latin degredare, from Latin de- “down” – (see de-) + gradus “step” (see grade (n.)).

–=–

In reality, a earn a degree is to “degrade”, which is why you receive grades (a degree of measurement) on your efforts, becoming legally limited and bound by the syndicate. Acceptance of artifice and title is the acceptance of one’s place diminished within the syndicate as a lesser subject – a cog in the wheel. This is not an honor, for the giver of that honer is not lawful or honorable, and in fact is literally criminal (confederation) in nature. The syndicate can only lower one’s standing, never raise it. For standing is mere legalese, and title requires subjection to the rules and regulations of the syndicate through the use of the surname, which again is an artificial person and property of government. In exchange for the extinguishing or free thought by students and laborers, the syndicate dispenses degrees, which represents one’s relationship and status within the syndicate, and rewards the silent with money and benefits. For the diploma and degree are of the state, not the school. This, again, is voluntary slavery. And the benefits for volunteers are quite enticing…

You could say that an education degree is a way of measuring the criminal degree of a person, in the form of his or her status assigned by the criminal syndicate government.

The word “graduation” in essence refers to temperature, as in refining or tempering the mind like crude oil and like a trained dog:

GRADUATION – From early 15c., in alchemy, “tempering, refining of something to a certain degree; measurement according to the four degrees of a quality,” from graduate (n.). General sense of “dividing into degrees” is from 1590s; meaning “action of receiving or giving an academic degree” is from early 15c.; in reference to the ceremony where a degree is given, from 1818.

GRADUATE – From early 15c., “one who holds a degree” (with man; as a stand-alone noun from mid-15c.), from Medieval Latin graduatus, past participle of graduarito take a degree,” from Latin gradus “step, grade” (see grade (n.)). As an adjective, from late 15c.

UPGRADE (v.) – “increase to a higher grade or rank,” 1904 (transitive); 1950 (intransitive), from up (adv.) + grade (v.). Related: Upgraded; upgrading.

GRADE (v.) – 1650s, “to arrange in grades,” from grade (n.). Related: Graded; grading.

GRADE (n.) – From the 1510s, “degree of measurement,” from French grade “grade, degree” (16c.), from Latin gradus “step, pace, gait, walk;” figuratively “a step, stage, degree,” related to gradito walk, step, go,” from PIE *ghredh- (cognates: Lithuanian gridiju “to go, wander,” Old Church Slavonic gredoto come,” Old Irish in-greinnhe pursues,” and second element in congress, progress, etc.).  Replaced Middle English gree “step, degree in a series,” from Old French grei “step,” from Latin gradus. Railway sense is from 1811. Meaning “class of things having the same quality or value” is from 1807; meaning “division of a school curriculum equivalent to one year” is from 1835; that of “letter-mark indicating assessment of a student’s work” is from 1886 (earlier used of numerical grades). Grade A “top quality, fit for human consumption” (originally of milk) is from a U.S. system instituted in 1912.

–=–

And of course to temper something is to assign a temperature (degree) to it:

TEMPERATURE  (n.)    mid-15c., “fact of being tempered, proper proportion;” 1530s, “character or nature of a substance,” from Latin temperatura “a tempering, moderation,” from temperatus, past participle of temperare “to be moderate; to mingle in due proportion” (see temper (v.))

TEMPORATE  (adj.)   late 14c., of persons, “modest, forbearing, self-restrained, not swayed by passion;” of climates or seasons, “not liable to excessive heat or cold,” from Latin temperatus “restrained, regulated, limited, moderate, sober, calm, steady,” from past participle of temperare “to moderate, regulate” (see temper (v.)). Related: Temperately; temperateness. Temperate zone is attested from 1550s.

–=–

To be idealistically trained by the syndicate is to be of moderate degree:

MODERATE (n.)    “one who holds moderate opinions on controversial subjects,” 1794, from moderate (adj.). Related: Moderatism; -moderantism. (adj.) “within bounds, observing moderation;” figuratively “modest, restrained,” past participle of moderari “to regulate, mitigate, restrain, temper, set a measure, keep (something) within measure,” related to modus “measure,” from PIE *med-es-, from base *med- (see medical (adj.)). The notion is “keeping within due measure.” In English, of persons from early 15c.; of opinions from 1640s.

–=–

So what happens at the end of the tempering of animals and quelling of free thought?

The diploma is bestowed as a literal license to do what is otherwise illegal, and still often unlawful despite it.

Stemming from the word “diplomacy”, which is just another form of advocacy, we can further understand just what a diploma truly represents:

DIPLOMA (n.) – From the 1640s, “state paper, official document,” from Latin diploma, from Greek diploma “license, chart,” originally “paper folded double,” from diploun “to double, fold over,” from diploos “double” (see diploid) + -oma. Specific academic sense is 1680s in English.

DIPLOMACY (n.) – From 1796, from French diplomatie, formed from diplomatediplomat” (on model of aristocratie from aristocrate), from Latin adjective diplomaticos, from diploma (genitive diplomatis) “official document conferring a privilege (see diploma; for sense evolution, see diplomatic).

DIPLOMATIC (adj.) – From 1711, “pertaining to documents, texts, charters,” from Medieval Latin diplomaticus, from diplomat-, stem of diploma (see diploma). Meaning “pertaining to international relations” is recorded from 1787, apparently a sense evolved in 18c. from the use of diplomaticus in Modern Latin titles of collections of international treaties, etc., in which the word referred to the “texts” but came to be felt as meaning “pertaining to international relations.” In the general sense of “tactful and adroit,” it dates from 1826. Related: Diplomatically.

REPORT (n.) – From late 14c., “an account brought by one person to another, rumor,” from Old French reportpronouncement, judgment” (Modern French rapport), from reporterto tell, relate” (see report (v.)). Meaning “resounding noise, sound of an explosion” is from 1580s. Meaning “formal statement of results of an investigation” first attested 1660s; sense of “teacher’s official statement of a pupil’s work and behavior” is from 1873 (report card in the school sense first attested 1919).

–=–

A diploma is then really nothing more and nothing less than the conferment of State privilege and license, so that one may be judged officially as tame and trainable enough to join the syndicate monopoly within its institutions. The candidate must be employable (able to be used as a commodity) within the various government regulated industries, and must be entrusted with its  secrets, not the least of which is its own fraudulent nature.

I wonder where the word “university” came from?

UNIVERS’ITYnoun An assemblage of colleges established in any place, with professors for instructing students in the sciences and other branches of learning, and where degrees are conferred. A university is properly a universal school, in which are taught all branches of learning, or the four faculties of theology, medicine, law and the sciences and arts. (–Webster’s 1828)

UNIVERSITAS – Latin. In the civil law. A corporation aggregate. Literally, a whole formed out of many individuals. (–Black’s 1st)

UNIVERSUS – Latin. The whole; all together. (–Black’s 1st)

UNIVERSAL AGENT – One who if appointed to do all the acts which the principal can personally do, and which he may lawfully delegate the power to another to do. (–Black’s 1st)

UNI – word-forming element meaning “having one only,” from Latin uni-, comb. form of unus (see one).

–=–

E Pluribus Unum…

The only competition between Universities is with their sports teams. The teaching of misinformation and doctrine is universal throughout. For teachers and professors are advocates too, whose credentials demand conformity to syllabus and syndicalism.

A diploma really represents a permission bestowed by the syndicate through universal (university) control of information that one may be of a certain vocation. This is no different than a priest telling you that you have a calling. It is the very definition of syndicalist education: work training.

VOCATION (n.) – early 15c., “spiritual calling,” from Old French vocacioncall, consecration; calling, profession” (13c.) or directly from Latin vocationem (nominative vocatio), literally “a calling, a being called” from vocatus “called,” past participle of vocare to call” (see voice (n.)). Sense of “one’s occupation or profession” is first attested 1550s.

CALLING (n.) – “vocation,” mid-13c., verbal noun from call (v.). The sense traces to I Cor. vii:20.

CALL (v.) – Sanskrit garhati meaning to “bewail, criticize;” and from Old High German klaga, German Klage “complaint, grievance, lament, accusation;” etc… From 13th Century call meaning “to give a name to.”

CALLER (n.) – Circa 1500, “one who proclaims,” agent noun from call (v.)

VOUCH (v.) – From early 14c., “summon into court to prove a title,” from Anglo-French voucher, Old French vocher to call, summon, invoke, claim,” probably from Gallo-Roman *voticare, metathesis of Latin vocitare to call to, summon insistently,” frequentative of Latin vocare “to call, call upon, summon” (see voice (n.)). Meaning “guarantee to be true or accurate” is first attested 1590s. Related: Vouched; vouching.

GUARANTEE (n.) – From the 1670s, altered (perhaps via Spanish garante), from earlier garrant warrant that the title to a property is true,” early 15c., from Old French garantdefender, protector,” from Germanic (see warrant (n.)). For form evolution, see gu-. Originally “person giving something as security;” sense of the “pledge” itself (which is properly a guaranty) developed 17c.

WARRANT (v.) – From late 13th Century “to keep safe from danger,” from Old North French warantir safeguard, protect; guarantee, pledge” (Old French garantir), from warant (see warrant (n.)). Meaning “to guarantee to be of quality” is attested from late 14c.; sense of “to guarantee as true” is recorded from c.1300. Related: Warranted; warranting; warrantable.

SURETY (n.) – c.1300, “a guarantee, promise, pledge, an assurance,” from Old French seurté “a promise, pledge, guarantee; assurance, confidence” (12c., Modern French sûreté), from Latin securitatem (nominative securitas) “freedom from care or danger, safety, security,” from securus (see secure (adj.)). From late 14c. as “security, safety, stability; state of peace,” also “certainty, certitude; confidence.” Meaning “one who makes himself responsible for another” is from early 15c. Until 1966, the French national criminal police department was the Sûreté nationale.

BORROW (v.) – From Old English borgianto lend, be surety for,” from Proto-Germanic *borgpledge” (cognates: Old English borgpledge, security, bail, debt,” Old Norse borgato become bail for, guarantee,” Middle Dutch borghento protect, guarantee,” Old High German boragen “to beware of,” German borgen “to borrow; to lend”), from PIE root *bhergh- (1) “to hide, protect” (see bury). Sense shifted in Old English to “borrow,” apparently on the notion of collateral deposited as security for something borrowed. Related: Borrowed; borrowing.

PLEDGE (n.) – From mid-14c., “surety, bail,” from Old French plege (Modern French pleige) “hostage, security, bail,” probably from Frankish *pleganto guarantee,” from *pleg-, a West Germanic root meaning “have responsibility for” (cognates: Old Saxon pleganvouch for,” Middle Dutch pliento answer for, guarantee,” Old High German pflegan “to care for, be accustomed to,” Old English pleon “to risk the loss of, expose to danger;” see plight (v.)). Meaning “allegiance vow attested by drinking with another” is from 1630s. Sense of “solemn promise” first recorded 1814, though this notion is from 16c. in the verb. Weekley notes the “curious contradiction” in pledge (v.) “to toast with a drink” (1540s) and pledge (n.) “the vow to abstain from drinking” (1833). Meaning “student who has agreed to join a fraternity or sorority” dates from 1901.

–=–

Advocates are heavily protected by the syndicate so that they may act in its interest, under its name, no matter how unlawful (yet legalized by the syndicate against the law) those actions may be. Doctors, for instance, must take extreme amounts of liability and malpractice insurance in order to protect their “practice.” The normalcy of this fact is quite frightening, as the common folk never seem to grasp that a Doctor’s whole “practice” is fraud in the first place. Every action, in other words, by a doctor is indeed malpractice and done so under a pseudonym protected by the syndicate.

This shirking of personal responsibility is key to the atrocities taking place within these institutions. Representing massive combinations of syndicalists, monopolies and trusts rule the day.

Do you have the right to work in the syndicate? Only if you can show permission from the animal training university center you attended and if your name is marked with a degree of crime. You must be confirmed into the syndicate due to your corroboration and willingness to commit legalized crime (crime by permission of the state). For you are thus forbidden to enter a specialty field while having your own opinions…

CREDENTIAL (n.) “that which entitles to credit,” 1756, probably a back-formation from credentials. Earlier in English as an adjective, “confirming, corroborating” (late 15c.). As a verb, “provide with credentials,” by 1828 (implied in dredentialed).

CREDENTIALS (n.) “letters entitling the bearer to certain credit or confidence,” 1670s, from Medieval Latin credentialis, from credentia (see credence). Probably immediately as a shortening of letters credential (1520s, with French word order); earlier was letter of credence (mid-14c.).

CREDIT (n.) – From the 1520s, from Middle French crédit (15c.) “belief, trust,” from Italian credito, from Latin credituma loan, thing entrusted to another,” from past participle of credereto trust, entrust, believe” (see credo). The commercial sense was the original one in English (creditor is mid-15c.). Meaning “honor, acknowledgment of merit,” is from c.1600. Academic sense of “point for completing a course of study” is 1904. Movie/broadcasting sense is 1914. Credit rating is from 1958; credit union is 1881, American English.

ACCREDIT (v.) – From the 1610s, from French accréditer, from à “to” (see ad-) + créditerto credit” (someone with a sum), from créditcredit” (see credit (n.)). Related: Accredited; accrediting.

CONFIDENCE – (n.) From early 15c., from Middle French confidence or directly from Latin confidentia, from confidentem (nominative confidens) “firmly trusting, bold,” present participle of confidereto have full trust or reliance,” from com, intensive prefix (see com-), + fidereto trust” (see faith). For sense of “swindle” see con (adj.).

CON – (adj.) “swindling,” 1889, American English, from confidence man (1849), from the many scams in which the victim is induced to hand over money as a token of confidence. Confidence with a sense of “assurance based on insufficient grounds” dates from 1590s.

CON – (n.) “study,” early 15c., from Old English cunnanto know, know how” (see can (v.1)).

CON- – word-forming element meaning “together, with,”

DREAD (v.) – late 12c., a shortening of Old English adrædan, contraction of ondrædancounsel or advise against,” also “to dread, fear, be afraid,” from on-against” + rædanto advise” (see read (v.)). Cognate of Old Saxon andradon, Old High German intraten. Related: Dreaded; dreading. As a noun from 12c.

MASTER’S DEGREE (n.) From late 14c., originally a degree giving one authority to teach in a university; from master (n.) in its general sense of “man of learning” (early 13c.), “a teacher” (c.1200).

MASTER (n.) – From late Old English mægesterone having control or authority,” from Latin magister (n.) “chief, head, director, teacher” (source of Old French maistre, French maître, Spanish and Italian maestro, Portuguese mestre, Dutch meester, German Meister), contrastive adjective (“he who is greater“) from magis (adv.) “more,” from PIE *mag-yos-, comparative of root *meg-great” (see mickle). Form influenced in Middle English by Old French cognate maistre. Meaning “original of a recording” is from 1904. In academic senses (from Medieval Latin magister) it is attested from late 14c., originally a degree conveying authority to teach in the universities. As an adjective from late 12c.

DOCTRINE (n.) – From late 14c., from Old French doctrine (12c.) “teaching, doctrine,” and directly from Latin doctrinateaching, body of teachings, learning,” from doctorteacher” (see doctor (n.)).

DOCTOR (n.) – c.1300, “Church father,” from Old French doctour, from Medieval Latin doctorreligious teacher, adviser, scholar,” in classical Latin “teacher,” agent noun from docereto show, teach, cause to know,” originally “make to appear right,” causative of decerebe seemly, fitting” (see decent).  Meaning “holder of highest degree in university” is first found late 14c.; as is that of “medical professional” (replacing native leech (n.2)), though this was not common till late 16c. The transitional stage is exemplified in Chaucer’s Doctor of phesike (Latin physica came to be used extensively in Medieval Latin for medicina). Similar usage of the equivalent of doctor is colloquial in most European languages: Italian dottore, French docteur, German doktor, Lithuanian daktaras, though these are typically not the main word in those languages for a medical healer. For similar evolution, see Sanskrit vaidya- “medical doctor,” literally “one versed in science.” German Arzt, Dutch arts are from Late Latin archiater, from Greek arkhiatroschief healer,” hence “court physician.” French médecin is a back-formation from médicine, replacing Old French miege, from Latin medicus.

LEECH (n.1) – “bloodsucking aquatic worm,” from Old English læce (Kentish lyce), of unknown origin (with a cognate in Middle Dutch lake). Commonly regarded as a transferred use of leech (n.2), but the Old English forms suggest a distinct word, which has been assimilated to leech (n.2) by folk etymology [see OED]. Figuratively applied to human parasites since 1784.

LEECH (n.2) – obsolete forphysician,” from Old English læce, probably from Old Danish læke, from Proto-Germanic *lekjazenchanter, one who speaks magic words; healer, physician” (cognates: Old Frisian letza, Old Saxon laki, Old Norse læknir, Old High German lahhi, Gothic lekeis “physician”), literally “one who counsels,” perhaps connected with a root found in Celtic (compare Irish liaigcharmer, exorcist, physician“) and Slavic (compare Serbo-Croatian lijekar, Polish lekarz), from PIE *lep-agiconjurer,” from root *leg-to collect,” with derivatives meaning “to speak” (see lecture (n.)). For sense development, compare Old Church Slavonic balijidoctor,” originally “conjurer,” related to Serbo-Croatian bajatienchant, conjure;” Old Church Slavonic vrači, Russian vračdoctor,” related to Serbo-Croatian vračsorcerer, fortune-teller.” The form merged with leech (n.1) in Middle English, apparently by folk etymology. In 17c., leech usually was applied only to veterinary practitioners. The fourth finger of the hand, in Old English, was læcfinger, translating Latin digitus medicus, Greek daktylus iatrikos, supposedly because a vein from that finger stretches straight to the heart.

LEECHCRAFT (n.) – “art of healing,” Old English læcecræft; see leech (2) + craft (n.).

BACCALAUREATE (n.) – 1620s, “university degree of a bachelor,” from Modern Latin baccalaureatus, from baccalaureusstudent with the first degree,” alteration of Medieval Latin baccalariusone who has attained the lowest degree in a university, advanced student lecturing under his master’s supervision but not yet having personal license” (altered by folk etymology or word-play, as if from bacca lauri “laurel berry,” laurels being awarded for academic success).

SOPHOMORE (n.) – 1680s, “student in the second year of university study,” literally “arguer,” altered from sophumer (1650s, from sophume, archaic variant form of sophism), probably by influence of folk etymology derivation from Greek sophos “wise” + morosfoolish, dull(a wise fool). The original reference might be to the dialectic exercises that formed a large part of education in the middle years. At Oxford and Cambridge, a sophister (from sophist with spurious -er as in philosopher) was a second- or third-year student (what Americans would call a “junior” might be a senior sophister).

SOPHISM (n.) – From early 15c., earlier sophime (mid-14c.), “specious but fallacious argument devised for purposes of deceit or to exercise one’s ingenuity,” from Old French sophimea fallacy, false argument” (Modern French sophisme), from Latin sophisma, from Greek sophismaclever device, skillful act, stage-trick,” from stem of sophizesthaibecome wise” (see sophist).

SOPHISTRY (n.) “specious but fallacious reasoning,” mid-14c., from Old French sophistrie (Modern French sophisterie), from Medieval Latin sophistria, from Latin sophista, sophistes (see sophist). “Sophistry applies to reasoning as sophism to a single argument” [Century Dictionary].

PUPIL (n.1) – “student,” late 14c., originally “orphan child, ward,” from Old French pupille (14c.) and directly from Latin pupillus (fem. pupilla) “orphan child, ward, minor,” diminutive of pupus “boy” (fem. pupa “girl”), probably related to puerchild,” possibly from PIE *pup-, from root *pu-to swell, inflate.” Meaning “disciple, student” first recorded 1560s. Related: Pupillary.

MONITOR (n.) – 1540s, “senior pupil at a school charged with keeping order, etc.,” from Latin monitorone who reminds, admonishes, or checks,” also “an overseer, instructor, guide, teacher,” agent noun from monereto admonish, warn, advise,” related to memini “I remember, I am mindful of,” and to mens “mind,” from PIE root *men-to think” (see mind (n.)).  The type of lizard so called because it is supposed to give warning of crocodiles (1826). Meaning “squat, slow-moving type of ironclad warship” (1862) so called from name of the first vessel of this design, chosen by the inventor, Swedish-born U.S. engineer John Ericsson (1803-1889), because it was meant to “admonish” the Confederate leaders in the U.S. Civil War. Broadcasting sense of “a device to continuously check on the technical quality of a transmission” (1931) led to special sense of “a TV screen displaying the picture from a particular camera.”

TEACHER (n.) – “one who teaches,” c.1300; agent noun from teach (v.). It was used earlier in a sense of “index finger” (late 13c.). Teacher’s pet attested from 1856.

INSTRUCTOR (n.) – mid-15c., from Old French instructeur and directly from Medieval Latin instructorteacher” (in classical Latin, “preparer“), agent noun from instruere (see instruct).

INSTRUCT (v.) – early 15c., from Latin instructus, past participle of instruerearrange, inform, teach,” literally “to build, erect,” from in- “on” (see in- (2)) + struereto pile, build” (see structure (n.)). Related: Instructed; instructing.

INFORM (v.) –  early 14c., “to train or instruct in some specific subject,” from Old French informerinstruct, inform, teach,” and directly from Latin informareto shape, form,” figuratively “train, instruct, educate,” from in- “into” (see in- (2)) + formare “to form, shape,” from forma “form” (see form (n.)). Varied with enform until c.1600. Sense of “report facts or news” first recorded late 14c. Related: Informed; informing.

PEDAGOGUE (n.) – From late 14c., “schoolmaster, teacher,” from Old French pedagogeteacher of children” (14c.), from Latin paedagogus, from Greek paidagogosslave who escorts boys to school and generally supervises them,” later “a teacher,” from pais (genitive paidos) “child” (see pedo-) + agogosleader,” from ageinto lead” (see act (n.)). Hostile implications in the word are at least from the time of Pepys (1650s). Related: Pedagogal.

PEDAGOGIC (adj.) – From 1781, from Latin paedagogicus, from Greek paidagogikossuitable for a teacher,” from paidagogosteacher” (see pedagogue).

MISTRESS (n.) – early 14c., “female teacher, governess,” from Old French maistressemistress (lover); housekeeper; governess, female teacher” (Modern French maîtresse), fem. of maistremaster” (see master (n.)). Sense of “a woman who employs others or has authority over servants” is from early 15c. Sense of “kept woman of a married man” is from early 15c.

PRECEPTOR (n.) – From early 15c., “tutor, instructor” (earliest reference might be to “expert in the art of writing“), from Latin praeceptorteacher, instructor,” agent noun from praecipere (see precept). Medical training sense attested from 1803.

PRECEPT – From late 14c., from Old French percept, percet (12c.), from Latin praeceptummaxim, rule of conduct, order,” noun use of neuter past participle of praeciperegive rules to, order, advise,” literally “take beforehand,” from praebefore” (see pre-) + capere (past participle captus) “to take” (see capable). For change of vowel, see biennial.

PROFESSOR (n.) – From late 14c., “one who teaches a branch of knowledge,” from Old French professeur (14c.) and directly from Latin professorperson who professes to be an expert in some art or science; teacher of highest rank,” agent noun from profiterilay claim to, declare openly” (see profess). As a title prefixed to a name, it dates from 1706. Short form prof is recorded from 1838. Professor: One professing religion. This canting use of the word comes down from the Elizabethan period, but is obsolete in England. [Thornton, “American Glossary,” 1912]

PEDAGOGY (n.) – 1580s, from Middle French pédagogie (16c.), from Latin paedagogia, from Greek paidagogiaeducation, attendance on boys,” from paidagogosteacher” (see pedagogue).

INSTRUCTOR (n.) – mid-15c., from Old French instructeur and directly from Medieval Latin instructorteacher” (in classical Latin, “preparer“), agent noun from instruere (see instruct).

GOVERNESS (n.) – mid-15c., “female ruler,” shortening of governouressea woman who rules” (late 14c.), from Old French governeressefemale ruler or administrator” (see governor + -ess); in the sense of “a female teacher in a private home” it is attested from 1712.

MAGISTERIAL (adj.) – 1630s, from Medieval Latin magisterialisof or pertaining to the office of magistrate, director, or teacher,” from Late Latin magisteriushaving authority of a magistrate,” from magisterchief, director” (see master (n.)). Related: Magisterially.

–=–
The Magic Spell
–=–

Stories of witchcraft and magic (magi-c) may be grandiose and over the top in the fiction and fantasy of syndicated media, but their practical application towards the education system can be readily defined within the etymology of words. Witches and warlocks cast spells. They do so with incantations of words and through the use of mythical symbols. For the spell to work the student must be taught spelling, and be graded in such art. But the education system never reveals to its students and descended “masters” of learning degrees just what spelling truly represents, for the student becomes the object of the spelled out words of approved textbooks, thus leaving an “educated” person under the spell of the syndicate. So let’s examine the origin of the spell, both in the spoken and in the written word:

SPELL (v.) – early 14c., “read letter by letter, write or say the letters of;” c.1400, “form words by means of letters,” apparently a French word that merged with or displaced a native Old English one; both are from the same Germanic root, but the French word had evolved a different sense. The native word is Old English spellianto tell, speak, discourse, talk,” from Proto-Germanic *spellam (cognates: Old High German spellonto tell,” Old Norse spjalla, Gothic spillonto talk, tell“), from PIE *spel- (2) “to say aloud, recite.” But the current senses seem to come from Anglo-French espeller, Old French espelirmean, signify, explain, interpret,” also “spell out letters, pronounce, recite,” from Frankish *spellonto tell” or some other Germanic source, ultimately identical with the native word.  Related: Spelled; spelling. In early Middle English still “to speak, preach, talk, tell,” hence such expressions as hear spellhear (something) told or talked about,” spell the windtalk in vain” (both 15c.). Meaning “form words with proper letters” is from 1580s. Spell outexplain step-by-step is first recorded 1940, American English. Shakespeare has spell (someone) backwardsreverse the character of, explain in a contrary sense, portray with determined negativity.”

–=–

“No one will enter the New World Order
unless he or she will make a pledge to worship Lucifer.
No one will enter the New Age
unless he will take a LUCIFERIAN Initiation.” 

–David Spangler, Director of Planetary Initiative, United Nations

–=–

Thus the legal language as a “term of art” could certainly be said to be a magic spell, a spell foisted upon the common people by using the common (vulgar) vernacular spelling of word,s which in fact are defined quite opposite of the character of that common language. Other spells as art-form languages include the medical and biological spelling as well as that of other educated magi-cians, each with their own terms of art. In other words, each institution of the syndicate has its own language (terms of art), and so each animal that ascends through the education system is destined to be caught up in the paradigm of his chosen profession, never to understand the many other professions offered, each with their own use of “spelling”. In this way, the trained (educated) animals are kept institutionalized within their own chosen professions. They profess the language of their own dialectic, separated devisively by all others through the use of language as terms of art.

And through this word magic that is cast as a spell upon the education of students, the belief in the spell creates credentialed men of degree and diploma, who will each defend their education and the titled status it creates and vests upon their person literally to the death and detriment of their fellow species. For they are spellbound by the spells of spelling and the prestige they believe (be-LIE-ve) it creates…

SPELLBOUND (adj.) – “to be bound by or as if by a spell,” 1742, from spell (n.1) + bound (adj.1) “fastened,” past participle of bind (v.).

SPELLING (n.) – From mid-15c., “action of reading letter by letter,” verbal noun from spell (v.1). Meaning “manner of forming words with letters” is from 1660s; meaning “a way a word has been spelled” is from 1731. Spelling bee is from 1878 (see bee; earlier spelling match, 1845; the act of winning such a schoolroom contest is described 1854 as to spell (someone) down).

SPELLER (n.) – c.1200, “a preacher;” mid-15c. apparently in the sense “a person who reads letter by letter;” 1864 of a book to teach orthography. Agent noun from spell (v.1).

SPELL (n.) – Old English spellstory, saying, tale, history, narrative, fable; discourse, command,” from Proto-Germanic *spellam (see spell (v.1)). Compare Old Saxon spel, Old Norse spjall, Old High German spel, Gothic spillreport, discourse, tale, fable, myth;” German Beispielexample.” From c.1200 as “an utterance, something said, a statement, remark;” meaning “set of words with supposed magical or occult powers, incantation, charm” first recorded 1570s; hence any means or cause of enchantment. The term ‘spell’ is generally used for magical procedures which cause harm, or force people to do something against their will — unlike charms for healing, protection, etc. [“Oxford Dictionary of English Folklore”] – Also in Old English, “doctrine; a sermon; religious instruction or teaching; the gospel; a book of the Bible;” compare gospel. – (n.2) – 1620s, “a turn of work in place of another,” from spell (v.2); compare Old English gespeliaa substitute.” Meaning shifted toward “continuous course of work” (1706), probably via notion of shift work (as at sea) where one man or crew regularly “spelled” another. Hence “continuous stretch” of something (weather, etc.), recorded by 1728. Hence also, via the notion in give a spell (1750) “relieve another by taking a turn of work” came the sense “interval of rest or relaxation” (1845), which took the word to a sense opposite what it had at the start.

SPELLBIND (v.) – “to bind by or as if by spell,” 1808, probably a back-formation from spellbound. Related: Spellbinding; spellbinder.

SPELL (v.2) – “work in place of (another),” 1590s, earlier spele, from Old English spelianto take the place of, be substitute for, represent,” related to gespeliasubstitute,” of uncertain origin. Perhaps related to spilianto play” (see spiel). Related: Spelled; spelling.

PINYIN (n.) – system of Romanized spelling for Chinese, 1963, from Chinese pinyinto spell, to combine sounds into syllables,” from pinput together” + yinsound, tone.” Adopted officially by the People’s Republic of China in 1958. Outside China gradually superseding the 19c. Wade-Giles system (Mao Tse-tung is Wade-Giles, Mao Zedong is pinyin).

SENTENCE (n.) – c.1200, “doctrine, authoritative teaching; an authoritative pronouncement,” from Old French sentencejudgment, decision; meaning; aphorism, maxim; statement of authority” (12c.) and directly from Latin sententiathought, way of thinking, opinion; judgment, decision,” also “a thought expressed; aphorism, saying,” from sentientem, present participle of sentirebe of opinion, feel, perceive” (see sense (n.)). Loss of first -i- in Latin by dissimilation. From early 14c. as “judgment rendered by God, or by one in authority; a verdict, decision in court;” from late 14c. as “understanding, wisdom; edifying subject matter.” From late 14c. as “subject matter or content of a letter, book, speech, etc.,” also in reference to a passage in a written work. Sense of “grammatically complete statement” is attested from mid-15c. “Meaning,” then “meaning expressed in words.” Related: Sentential.

–=–

“All the world’s indeed a stage
And we are merely players,
Conformers and portrayer’s;
Each another’s audience
Outside the guided cage.”

–Rush, lyrics to  “Limelight”

–=–

Acceptance of accreditation (a-credit/title-bestowed by the State) by the Magistrates (gods) of government through its education syndicate is indeed the representation of man as player upon the stage. And when the spell is cast and recognition realized, the morals and ethics of natural man fall to the side of what the syndicate gives license for as the re-presentation of man as a doctor, lawyer, professional, and so-called “master”. Presto! With an imaginary corporate costume change the man becomes an agent of government controlled by the syndicate through the “degree of crime” diploma bestowed. His or her actions become those of an enchanted puppet, doing the bidding of those who pull his or her fictional strings and pay pensions, while the illusion of living in the limelight corrupts and defects. And through this re-presentation of man as a spellbound victim of the degree scheme, the most unconscionable accomplishments against man and nature can be accomplished under the doctrine of the syndicate’s occult and magical spell.

ENCHANTMENT (n.) – c.1300, “act of magic or witchcraft; use of magic; magic power,” from Old French encantementmagical spell; song, concert, chorus,” from enchanterbewitch, charm,” from Latin incantareenchant, cast a (magic) spell upon,” from in- “upon, into” (see in- (2)) + cantareto sing” (see chant (v.)). Figurative sense of “allurement” is from 1670s. Compare Old English galdorsong,” also “spell, enchantment,” from galanto sing,” which also is the source of the second element in nightingale.

FASCINATE (v.) – 1590s, “bewitch, enchant,” from Middle French fasciner (14c.), from Latin fascinatus, past participle of fascinarebewitch, enchant, fascinate,” from fascinusspell, witchcraft,” of uncertain origin. Possibly from Greek baskanosbewitcher, sorcerer,” with form influenced by Latin farispeak” (see fame (n.)). To fascinate is to bring under a spell, as by the power of the eye; to enchant and to charm are to bring under a spell by some more subtle and mysterious power. [Century Dictionary]. The Greek word might be from a Thracian equivalent of Greek phaskeinto say;” compare also enchant, and German besprechento charm,” from sprechento speak.” Earliest used of witches and of serpents, who were said to be able to cast a spell by a look that rendered one unable to move or resist. Sense of “delight, attract” is first recorded 1815. Related: Fascinated; fascinating.

INCANTATION (n.) – late 14c., from Old French incantacionspell, exorcism” (13c.), from Latin incantationem (nominative incantatio) “art of enchanting,” noun of action from past participle stem of incantarebewitch, charm,” literally “sing spells” (see enchantment).

MANTRA (n.) – 1808, “that part of the Vedas which contains hymns,” from Sanskrit mantrassacred message or text, charm, spell, counsel,” literally “instrument of thought,” related to manyatethinks,” from PIE root *men-to think” (see mind (n.)). Sense of “special word used for meditation” is first recorded in English 1956.

CONJURATION (n.) – late 14c., coniuracioun, “conspiracy” (now obsolete), also “a calling upon something supernatural,” from Old French conjuracionspell, incantation, formula used in exorcism,” from Latin coniurationem (nominative coniuratio) “a swearing (oath) together, conspiracy,” noun of action from coniurare (see conjure).

CONJURE (v.) – late 13c., “command on oath,” from Old French conjurer “invoke, conjure” (12c.), from Latin coniurareto swear together; conspire,” from com-together” (see com-) + iurareto swear” (see jury (n.)). Magical sense is c.1300, for “constraining by spella demon to do one’s bidding. Related: Conjured; conjuring. Phrase conjure upcause to appear in the mind” (as if by magic) attested from 1580s.

CHARM (v.) – c.1300, “to recite or cast a magic spell,” from Old French charmer (13c.) “to enchant, to fill (someone) with desire (for something); to protect, cure, treat; to maltreat, harm,” from Late Latin carminare, from Latin carmen (see charm (n.)). In Old French used alike of magical and non-magical activity. In English, “to win over by treating pleasingly, delight” from mid-15c. Related: Charmed; charming. Charmed (short for I am charmed) as a conventional reply to a greeting or meeting is attested by 1825.

–=–

“I pledge allegiance, to the flag, of the United States of America…” is one quite familiar enchantment perpetrated upon youngsters in all grades of education, creating the religiously patriotic doctrine of unthinking yet unwavering support of said state and nation – a necessity for the syndication of education and its design of pedagogy. This pledge (oath) is even invoked as a spell in the name of God, which fascinates even the most staunch of self-proclaimed atheists. The language of education is the lore of the syndicate, harvesting and training young minds into a delightfully rendered incapacity to think and feel anything that would disrupt the spelled-out doctrine of the syndicate.

LORE (n.) – Old English larlearning, what is taught, knowledge, science, doctrine, art of teaching,” from Proto-Germanic *laizo (Old Saxon lera, Old Frisian lare, Middle Dutch lere, Dutch leer, Old High German lera, German Lehreteaching, precept, doctrine“), from PIE *leis- (1) “track, furrow” (see learn).

FOLKLORE (n.) – From 1846, coined by antiquarian William J. Thoms (1803-1885) as an Anglo-Saxonism (replacing popular antiquities) and first published in the “Athenaeum” of Aug. 22, 1846, from folk + lore. Old English folclar meant “homily.”  This word revived folk in a modern sense of “of the common people, whose culture is handed down orally,” and opened up a flood of compound formations, as in folk art (1892), folk-hero (1874), folk-medicine (1877), folk-tale/folk tale (1850; Old English folctalu meant “genealogy“), folk-song (1847), folk singer (1876), folk-dance (1877).

MYTHOLOGICAL (adj.) – From the 1610s, from Late Latin mythologicus, from Greek mythologikosversed in legendary lore,” from mythologia (see mythology). Related: Mythologically.

MYTH (n.) – In 1830, from French Mythe (1818) and directly from Modern Latin mythus, from Greek mythosspeech, thought, story, myth, anything delivered by word of mouth,” of unknown origin. Myths are “stories about divine beings, generally arranged in a coherent system; they are revered as true and sacred; they are endorsed by rulers and priests; and closely linked to religion. Once this link is broken, and the actors in the story are not regarded as gods but as human heroes, giants or fairies, it is no longer a myth but a folktale. Where the central actor is divine but the story is trivial … the result is religious legend, not myth.” [J. Simpson & S. Roud, “Dictionary of English Folklore,” Oxford, 2000, p.254]. General sense of “untrue story, rumor” is from 1840.

MYTHIC (adj.) – From the 1660s, from Late Latin mythicuslegendary,” from Greek mythikos, from mythos (see myth).

MYTHOPOEIC (adj.) – “pertaining to the creation of myths,” 1846, from Greek mytho-, comb. form of mythos (see myth) + poieinto make, create” (see poet).

MYTHOLOGY (n.) – In early 15c., “exposition of myths,” from Middle French mythologie and directly from Late Latin mythologia, from Greek mythologialegendary lore, a telling of mythic legends; a legend, story, tale,” from mythosmyth” (of unknown origin) + -logy “study.” Meaning “a body of myths” first recorded 1781.

–=–

One might call the “student body” a “body of myths”, as they are literally engaged in the study (-logy) of modern myths (mythos).

Each individually titled character in American history, from presidents portrayed as fabled legends instead of frail old men, to philanthropists who steal from the poor only to partially give back to the poor in order to maintain the” welfare system”, are granted this modern mythological stature in the government’s educational lore called “textbooks”. For only from within the syndicate of the controllers of education is the lore chosen to be prescribed upon its studious victims. Thus, the purely patriotic (religious) myth of the “founding fathers” were born; known not as the masonic secret society it was but as the romanticized good guys that created this nation through a compact of indebtedness (constitution).

This doctrine is necessary to keep generation after generation as worshipers of their fathers; a fallacious title placed on a dark history in order to hide the true nature of the centralized syndicate that was berthed by those masonic founders. This historical lie is ingrained into the population thanks to government-required education. It is the institution of learned ignorance.

LEARN (v.) – Old English leornianto get knowledge, be cultivated, study, read, think about,” from Proto-Germanic *liznojan (cognates: Old Frisian lernia, Middle Dutch leeren, Dutch leren, Old High German lernen, German lernento learn,” Gothic laisI know“), with a base sense of “to follow or find the track,” from PIE *leis- (1) “track, furrow.” Related to German Gleis “track,” and to Old English læst “sole of the foot” (see last (n.)). The transitive sense (He learned me how to read), now vulgar, was acceptable from c.1200 until early 19c., from Old English læranto teach” (cognates: Dutch leren, German lehrento teach,” literally “to make known;” see lore), and is preserved in past participle adjective learned “having knowledge gained by study.” Related: Learning.

TEACH (v.) – Old English tæcan (past tense tæhte, past participle tæht) “to show, point out, declare, demonstrate,” also “to give instruction, train, assign, direct; warn; persuade,” from Proto-Germanic *taikijanto show” (cognates: Old High German zihan, German zeihento accuse,” Gothic ga-teihanto announce“), from PIE *deik- “to show, point out” (see diction). Related to Old English tacen, tacnsign, mark” (see token). Related: Taught; teaching. The usual sense of Old English tæcan was “show, declare, warn, persuade” (compare German zeigento show,” from the same root); while the Old English word for “to teach, instruct, guide” was more commonly læran, source of modern learn and lore.

BAD-MOUTH (v.) – “abuse someone verbally,” 1941, probably ultimately from noun phrase bad mouth (1835), in Black English, “a curse, spell,” translating an idiom found in African and West Indian languages. Related: Bad-mouthed; bad-mouthing.

SKILLED – (adj.) 1550s, past participle adjective from skill (v.) “to have personal and practical knowledge” (c.1200), from Old Norse skiljaseparate, part, divide; break off, break up; part company, take leave; discern, distinguish; understand, find out; decide, settle,” from the source of skill (n.).

–=–

Teaching particular skills as subjects has the design of separation, where deep knowledge is hidden in light of a particular subject matter. In this way, highly-skilled professionals are extremely low-skilled in everything else, and so never learn past what subject they are educated in. This creates specialists, which are perhaps the worst kind of advocate. For a specialist practices only his or her specialty, remaining purposefully blind to all other avenues of knowledge even when it co-relates to that specialty. In truth, knowledge knows no boundaries or subjection (subjects). But the best way to control a person is to limit their perspective, like placing blinders upon a horse.

Even physical education, hard work, and sleep for the common animals is part of the spell curriculum in school, where students can be recessed from mental education only to be breathed, slogged, and then napped:

BREATHE (n.) – c.1600, “a living creature, one who breathes,” agent noun from breathe. Meaning “spell of exercise to stimulate breathing” is from 1836; that of “a rest to recover breath” is from 1901.

SLOG (n.) – 1846, “a hard hit,” from slog (v.). Sense of “spell of hard work” is from 1888.

NAP (n.) – “short spell of sleep,” c.1300, from nap (v.). With take (v.) from c.1400.

–=–

Later in life or in adolescence, other profitable spells can be cast in the form of addiction or pointless habit to support the redundant commerce of the corporate state and syndicate:

SMOKE (n.2) – “cigarette,” slang, 1882, from smoke (n.1). Also “opium” (1884). Meaning “a spell of smoking tobacco” is recorded from 1835.

WORKOUT (n.) – 1909, “boxing bout for training,” from work (v.) + out (adv.). General sense of “spell of strenuous physical exercise” is attested by 1922. Verbal phrase work outsolve” (a problem, etc.) is from 1848. Sense of “succeed” attested by 1909.

–=–

Perhaps you will study and learn the magic of being a pharmacist… or perhaps a pharmaceutical advocate and expert witness?

PHARMACY (n.) – From late 14c., “a medicine,” from Old French farmaciea purgative” (13c.), from Medieval Latin pharmacia, from Greek pharmakeiause of drugs, medicines, potions, or spells; poisoning, witchcraft; remedy, cure,” from pharmakeus (fem. pharmakis) “preparer of drugs, poisoner, sorcorer” from pharmakondrug, poison, philter, charm, spell, enchantment.” Meaning “use or administration of drugs” is attested from c.1400; that of “place where drugs are prepared and dispensed” is first recorded 1833. The ph- was restored 16c. in French, 17c. in English (see ph).

PUNDIT (n.) –  From the 1670s, “learned Hindu,” especially one versed in Sanskrit lore, from Hindi payndita learned man, master, teacher,” from Sanskrit payndita-sa learned man, scholar,” of uncertain origin. Broader application in English is first recorded 1816. Related: Punditry.

CABBALA (n.) – From the 1520s, from Medieval Latin cabbala, from Mishnaic Hebrew qabbalahreception, received lore, tradition,” especially “tradition of mystical interpretation of the Old Testament,” from qibbelto receive, admit, accept.” Compare Arabic qabalahe received, accepted.”

Or perhaps you may be a student of war and occupation under the Leiber Code, taking a career in the military and attending an academy for the purposes of receiving the ultimate credential – a license to kill!!!

CADET (n.) – c.1610, “younger son or brother,” from French cadetmilitary student officer,” noun use of adjective, “younger” (15c.), from Gascon capdet “captain, chief, youth of a noble family,” from Late Latin capitellum, literally “little chief,” hence, “inferior head of a family,” diminutive of Latin caput “head” (see capitulum). “The eldest son being regarded as the first head of the family, the second son the cadet, or little head” [Kitchin].  Apparently younger sons from Gascon noble families were sent to French court to serve as officers, which gave the word its military meaning. In English, the meaning “gentleman entering the military as a profession” is from 1650s, and that of “student at a military college” is from 1775.

–=–

Lost in this sense of unfounded superiority and honor, Webster’s 1828 Dictionary of the English Language explains that the truth about career military men and women is far less noble or honorable when put into simplistic terms of art:

SOLDIER, noun soljur. [from Latin solidus, a piece of money, the pay of a soldier ] 1. A man engaged in military service; one whose occupation is military; a man enlisted for service in an army; a private, or noe in the ranks. There ought to be some time for sober reflection between the life of a soldier and his death. 2. A man enrolled for service, when on duty or embodied for military discipline; a private; as a militia soldier 3. Emphatically, a brave warrior; a man of military experience and skill, or a man of distinguished valor. In this sense, an officer of any grade may be denominated a soldier.

MER’CENARY, adjective [Latin mercenarius, from merces, reward, wages, mercor, to guy.] 1. Venal; that may be hired; actuated by the hope of reward; moved by the love of money; as a mercenary prince or judge. 2. Hired; purchased by money; as mercenary services; mercenary soldiers. 3. Sold for money; as mercenary blood. 4. Greedy of gain; mean; selfish; as a mercenary disposition. 5. Contracted from motives of gain; as a mercenary marriage. (noun) One who is hired; a soldier that is hired into foreign service; a hireling.

VE’NAL – adjective [Latin venalis, from venco, to be sold.] 1. Mercenary; prostitute; that may be bought or obtained for money or other valuable consideration; as a venal muse; venal services. 2. That may be sold; set to sale; as, all offices are venal in a corrupt government. 3. Purchased; as a venal vote.

PROS’TITUTE, verb transitive [Latin prostituo; pro and statuo, to set.] 1. To offer freely to a lewd use, or to indiscriminate lewdness. 2. To give up to any vile or infamous purpose; to devote to any thing base; to sell to wickedness; as, to prostitute talents to the propagation of infidel principles, to prostitute the press to the publication of blasphemy. 3. To offer or expose upon vile terms or to unworthy persons. – (adjective) Openly devoted to lewdness; sold to wickedness or to infamous purposes. Made bold by want and prostitute for bread. – (noun) 1. A base hireling; a mercenary; one who offers himself to infamous employments for hire.

MILI’TIA, noun [Latin from miles, a soldier; Gr. war, to fight, combat, contention. The primary sense of fighting is to strive, struggle, drive, or to strike, to beat, Eng. moil, Latin molior; Heb. to labor or toil.] The body of soldiers in a state enrolled for discipline, but not engaged in actual service except in emergencies; as distinguished from regular troops, whose sole occupation is war or military service. The militia of a country are the able bodied men organized into companies, regiments and brigades, with officers of all grades, and required by law to attend military exercises on certain days only, but at other times left to pursue their usual occupations.

–=–

The difference between a militia man and a military person should be clear at this point. For whom could be more an advocate (whore) of the syndicate than those who would kill others for profit on its behalf and in its name? Murder, even by any other name, is the primary degree of crime bestowed upon these mercenaries. A career soldier is not honorable. And so the artifice term of art by the name of “honor” is instilled into these mercenaries; a false religious belief that their actions are not merely for personal gain with the end of spreading the syndicate’s world monopolies by their boots, bullets, and bombs.

The horrific truth is that soldiers and police are hired to protect government and the syndicate from the people – to keep the people in their place as subjects and dependents.

Where is our militia to protect us from them?

–=–
Conclusion
–=–

The education of human animals is again not to offer self-actualizing wisdom or knowledge, but to instead create a class of persons that will not question the authority of the syndicate, its rules, and most importantly its opinions. The arrogance of those who wear this tempered status upon their lapel and hang their diplomas on their office wall is only a sign of how controllable that person is and how little it takes for him or her to sell their soul to the syndicate. Doctors peddle the syndicate’s drugs. Nurses peddle the syndicate’s vaccines. Attorneys peddle the syndicate’s statutes. Judges peddle the syndicates opinion’s. Teachers and professors peddle the syndicates history. And accountants peddle the syndicates double-books.

During the learning-to-labor process of education, as we work to achieve the proper level of control-ability (brain washing), we are allotted each semester what is called progress reports.

PROGRESS (n.) – From late 14c., “a going on, action of walking forward,” from Old French progres (Modern French progrès), from Latin progressusa going forward,” from past participle of progredi (see progression). In early use in English especially “a state journey by royalty.” Figurative sense of “growth, development, advancement to higher stages” is from c.1600. To be in progress “underway” is attested by 1849. Progress report attested by 1865.

PROGRESS (v.) – 1590s in the literal sense; c.1600 in the figurative sense, from progress (n.). OED says the verb was obsolete in English 18c. but was reformed or retained in America and subsequently long regarded in Britain as an Americanism. Related: Progressed; progressing.

PROGRESSIVE (adj.) – c.1600, “characterized by advancement” (in action, character, etc.), from progress (n.) + -ive, or else from French progressif, from past participle stem of Latin progredi. Of taxation, from 1889; of jazz, from 1947. Meaning “characterized by striving for change and innovation, avant-garde, liberal” is from 1908. In the socio-political sense “favoring reform; radically liberal,” it emerged in various British contexts from the 1880s; in the U.S. it was active as a movement in the 1890s and a generation thereafter, the name being taken again from time to time, most recently by some more liberal Democrats and other social activists, by c.2000. The noun in the sense “one who favors social and political change in the name of progress” is first attested 1865 (originally in Christianity). Earlier in a like sense were progressionist (1849, adjective; 1884, noun), progressist (1848). Related: Progressively; progressiveness.

–=–

To put this into perspective, it needs to be said here that at some point the idea of progression (progressiveness) with no means to an end is a dangerous calamity being sold to each new generation, with the purposeful intent to strain the ability of future generations to keep and cherish the values, ethics, and morals of their forefathers. How can a society be in a permanent state of progress and change? If progress is perpetual, then where does progress end? What is the purpose of a political foundation if not to prevent such oxymoronic political thought? This concept of unlimited or unending progress means that any ethical code or limits due to scriptural or other historical and sacred ethics and values attained by each advancement of progression will also necessarily need to be changed to fit the new progress and the people’s opinion of that progress. In this way the idea of liberalism being “one who favors social and political change in the name of progress” does not make sense as a permanent state of thought, but instead necessarily requires at some point in time that one’s liberal political stance must reverse itself when such progressive ideas have been met in one’s lifetime. Thus a political conservative must be created out of the satiated liberal who has attained his limited sensibility of what progress is in his lifetime based on defeating his own fathers morals, ethics, and values.

If progress is never-ending and seeks no limit, so too must be the degradation of all that is sacred and ethical.

For example, the medical practice of cloning has now jumped from of the pages of science fiction’s apocalyptic warnings into the hands of the industrialized syndicalists of the medical and scientific “progress” machine. It’s moral implications of yesterday must therefore also be progressed in the minds and beliefs of the new generations of mankind, or else such progress is just not possible as a publicly acceptable entity. Since there is no end to the  liberal (progressive) possibilities regarding progress, both in mind and in reality, we have just opened a perpetual paradox that includes ultimately such concepts as the opening of Pandora’s Box just to scientifically prove what is inside. All of this is ironically based upon the newer generations being “educated” with progressive ideals, which necessarily must go against the old ideals in order to have progress from them. The education syndicate is teaching ever more liberal progressive sentiments to every new generation. Eventually those ideals that seemed progressive as a student become reality in the life of the “graduated” student in his or her chosen career, essentially creating generational morals and ethics that can only be described as temporary in nature. And at some time in his or her life, that former student of education will ultimately become conservative (a waning to conserve) of his or her once liberal ideals, for they eventually will come to fruition in the progression of that lifetime. This is the way of unhindered progress. This is how the antiquated notion of evil is being effectually bred into cultural society through the washing of young brains with “education” at an ever quickening pace. The young animals are being corralled, conditioned, and credentialed as with the brand of a farmer upon his cattle. And the older, more refined, already credentialed and experienced former liberal-turned-conservative animals are too vested in this ever-progressing machine to stand up for their more mature values, for they will be retiring soon and bestowed with fat pensions for which making a risky stand this late in life is said to be left to the younger generations. So there is no one experienced left to make a stand, except for the un-credentialed, un-enfranchised, un-respected men like myself, whom reside outside of the box looking in while warning those inside that the seems of the box are about to break.

But alas, with no credentials, who will listen to the likes of me? The disenfranchised? The impoverished? The critical patients? Before they can curtail the progression that will make their life’s work obsolete, the elder conservatives can only watch helplessly as their modernly established and decaying ethics and their now conservative values crumble under progress’s charge, and a new generation takes over while the older ones sell out to progress for the sake of old-age insurance and monthly pension stipends.

In the end, we don’t ever beat them, we cooperatively join them against our best interest – in the interest of our wallets.

And the steamroller ride into the progressive unknown continues as loosely scheduled, with no schedule at all, no end, and with no inhibitions or limits. We progress purely in the name of progress, for progress’ sake, with the goal of unrepentant progress. For we do not teach our children well, and in our stead allow government to do it for us, selling our responsibility for the chance to have taxpayer funded daycare that will ensure a “common core” of progressively educated fools enjoying an educated and managed autistic epsilon workforce.

The children are being taught that their parents are way too conservative to be a part of their generation’s new progressiveness – same as the old progressiveness – just like the last generation and the ones before it and forward in perpetuity. And they are given the tools of fallacy and idealism – of progress without meaning or logical reasoning – to defeat our warnings and loving advice. It is a fitting revenge to pay us back for our own similar learned behavior towards our parents in our own liberal childhoods.

And most importantly, the media is right there to support the progression of insanity, changing subtly the meanings of words like liberal and conservative with each new election cycle, ensuring the generational gap called “progress”.

So are you educated?

Do you claim your degree (of crime) in the name of syndicalist progress?

Is your precious diploma in a frame upon your office wall?

Are your children’s progress reports hanging under magnets upon the fridge?

Are you your own worst nightmare, or are you allowing the syndicate to turn your own child into that?

–=–
The Syndicate In Action
–=–

Listed below are some of my own research projects delving into the designs and methods of the syndicate.

My research lecture (video) on Common Core, Globalization, and Agenda 21 (highly recommended):

https://realitybloger.wordpress.com/2013/12/23/common-core-agenda-21-and-global-governance/

On the origins and purpose of Common Core:

https://realitybloger.wordpress.com/2013/08/29/core-making-children-stupider-around-the-world/

https://realitybloger.wordpress.com/2013/09/01/core-our-common-enemy/

https://realitybloger.wordpress.com/2013/10/21/united-states-and-its-military-now-rotten-to-the-core/

On Social Security – now in over 130 nations! The mark of the beasts.

https://realitybloger.wordpress.com/2012/04/24/social-security-the-international-mark-of-the-beast/

On Geo-Engineering now being taught as normal in schools:

https://realitybloger.wordpress.com/2014/05/11/degrees-in-geo-engineering-and-sustainable-development/

On the financial side, the CAFR is everything, its rules created by private associations (many links inside):

https://realitybloger.wordpress.com/2014/01/20/cafr-school-week-on-the-corporation-nation-radio/

.

Again, applying your own experiences in confronting this syndicate to the above information should clarify many things.

.

–Clint Richardson (realitybloger.wordpress.com)
–Thursday, November 6th, 2014

It’s Time To Join The Reality Movement


There’s a funny thing about the word “truth”…

Well, it’s not that funny for those of us who seek to live in “reality”.

You see, the word truth is subjective. One man’s truth may be another man’s fiction. And yet both can’t help but be bound within reality, for reality exists regardless of perceived truth. While reality does not change, truth can be declared to be completely opposite of reality, reinforced by media, popular culture, and even the law to overpower and cover up reality.

Let’s use a hypothetical example.

Let’s say that in reality, you just murdered a man on camera in front of 2 witnesses. In reality, this fact exists despite what one man believes is the truth (think O.J Simpson). For instance, your mother might never believe you are a murderer no mater what evidence is put before her. She could literally watch you commit the act on that camera footage and still hold tightly to her own personal truth – that her son or daughter could never commit murder.

Now let’s say you are standing in court accused of murder. But lets also say that you have either killed or silenced through bribery or threat and duress all witnesses, and have managed to magnetically erase all film footage from that surveillance tape (with mother’s help).

Has reality changed?

No. You killed that man. There were witnesses. The murder was indeed caught on tape. Nothing has changed in reality, for reality can never be changed.

Has the truth and the re-presentation of truth changed?

Absolutely. For the truth is ultimately going to be decided by the final opinion of the jury in that courtroom, whom did not witness reality. The jury is not considering reality, only truth; no matter how far from reality that truth is presented. The jury’s consideration of truth is only as good as the evidence introduced into that court, and yet reality is not ever one of the things presented, for reality took place long before that court proceeding. History of reality is but the best accepted truth of past reality. In fact, a court is literally the re-presentment of a simulated history of reality based on nothing but current truth. But if the truth is a lie or a misrepresentation of reality, as it almost always is, then we are faced with a daunting reality…

That there is no truth!

There is only reality.

In the end, since no evidence of reality was able to be presented in court, the jury is literally required to base their opinion upon the truth instead of reality. And ultimately,  in this case of your murdering another man, the truth is of course the opposite of reality. And the reality is that you just got away with murder based on a lack of representative proof of reality…

Or you could say that the truth has just indeed set you free!

In fact, this pretty much sounds like the reason government appears to operate legitimately. After all, government is a fictional entity that controls reality by manipulating the truth about its own reality. And of course government controls the courts that ultimately decide on the reality of truth. Thus, it could be said that the fictional, de facto (illegitimate) government acts in the realm of purposefully corrupted truth, and is thus immune from reality. This, in a word, can be defined as “sovereignty”. Government is only as real as the belief of the people in its truth.

But let’s really pin this down by taking a look at how these words are defined in the dictionary:

Truth (from Webster’s Dictionary of English Language, 1828)

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.
2. 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.
7. Honesty; virtue.
8. Exactness; conformity to rule.
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.

Wow! Truth is conformity to fact, words, or thoughts? What if the fact, words, or thoughts are not based in reality? After all, it was a true fact that the Earth was flat, and that sailors might foll off the edge into space. But this truth was not reality. Truth is a “correct opinion”? Really? What about the opinion of the court, which is always by law correct until altered (as if reality can be altered)? What about when the court’s opinion was that citizens should be subject to eugenic sterilization? Was that truth? And if truth is honesty, what do we call it when an honest man states a lie while believing it to be the honest truth? Many men have known the truth, only to find later that they were incorrect in their assumption. And yet reality never changed, because reality is not based on current, past, or future “truth”, but is in fact immune from the perception of truth.

It would be equally accurate to say God’s existence, whether real or not, is also completely immune from the many thousands of truths called religious beliefs and doctrine. God needs not man’s truth (belief) to exist in reality… or to not exist.

Half-Truth (From Black’s Law 2nd Edition)

A deceitful act where only part of the truth is told where all of the truth will lead to a different conclusion.

So there can be a half-truth… and yet there is no such thing as a half-reality…

Reality, n. (From Webster’s Dictionary of English Language, 1828)

1. Actual being or existence of any thing; truth; fact; in distinction from mere appearance. A man may fancy he understands a critic, when in reality he does not comprehend his meaning.
2. Something intrinsically important, not merely matter of show. And to realities yield all her shows.
3. In the schools, that may exist of itself, or which has a full and absolute being of itself, and is not considered as a part of any thing else.
4. In law, immobility, or the fixed, permanent nature of property; as chattels which savor of the reality.

So while the truth can sometimes in happenstance mirror reality, the truth does not have a requirement to be true to or describe reality. Truth may be a belief that is not steeped in reality, and yet still be believed to be reality. And truth may be manufactured to appear to be reality, even though it is not… and that truth will be believed over reality. While truth needs not be created with intrinsic value, reality is the definition of something intrinsic. Reality cannot be un-intrinsic or false, while the illusion of truth may certainly prevail over intrinsic reality. And while reality has only one disposition, which is reality itself, the truth may have multiple dispositions – some of which even contradict each other.

So, in reality, the truth really only has one post-requisite requirement to be accepted as reality… belief by others. And preferably in politics, this is a belief by the majority of the masses.

Isn’t it time to retire the “Truth Movement” for a better and more realistic alternative? After all, how many truths are there about 9/11?

Isn’t it time to comprehend that “truth” will never be officially recognized as reality?

Isn’t it time to stop letting the reality of crimes and criminals be masked by the false-truth that government courts spew out to protect those crimes and criminals?

Isn’t it time to become the “Reality Movement”?

For truth is the Matrix!!!

.

–Clint Richardson (realitybloger.wordpress.com)
–Wednesday, January 22nd, 2014