Discernment, Disease and the Destruction of Reality

The past four years and change have demonstrated the profound difference between perception and reality and between fact and fiction. And for me it brought to mind the astute vision of Paddy Chayevsky. As a screenwriter who gave us the film Altered States as well as the earlier Network, he clearly recognized this schism. The former movie questioned the nature of reality and the latter the apparent power of TV to subjugate and replace it and to continually occupy and control the minds of millions while simultaneously maintaining the continuing battle for ratings.

A brief aside: the available varieties of altered states number between several and numerous. There is the hypnotic state. There is the delta state, during which the lowest recorded brain activity occurs. It is the state that often follows staring at a television (or other glowing device). It is likewise the state that allows “grown-ups” to willingly allow toxins to enter them and to allow the same toxins (often while serving as ad hoc medical assistants) to enter their offspring. It’s the state of being under a spell. It’s a state that allows one to believe in a great many non-existent threats including but not limited to “the delta variant.”

What precisely is that? Is it yet another strain of you-know-what as opposed to the flu? Is it that old fashioned common occurrence we used to call a cold? Is it that annoyance we used to call an allergy? Is it a name for becoming sick as a result of submitting to a toxic injection. And now I’m told the delta (asleep) variant and the omicron (m-o-r-o-n-i-c for you Scrabble players) variant got together and made the “deltacron.” Thanks anyway, NPR et al but personally, I liked it better when the blues had a baby and they called it rock and roll.

May I Please Have Your Attention Even Though I’m Not a Designated Expert

Meanwhile, I try not to personalize matters. I know I shouldn’t because it clouds one’s thinking. Still I find it strange, somewhat depressing and deeply disconcerting that those people who know me or others like me, and hear (or appear to hear) what I and others perceive and express, are not effected and instead remain nice and normal and oblivious. I don’t attempt, incidentally, in any aggressive way to remove the scales from their eyes. That would be rude. It would also be counterproductive. Still I naively and foolishly once believed that exposure to a differing perspective might have produced in someone (in at least one person) an effect, a small but at least identifiable one. This did not and apparently could not happen.

It’s easy to see why, so self-evident that I hesitate to state it. I am, alas, not an “expert.” I have no credentials or accreditation. I did not attend the right academy. I attended, in fact, no academy. I appear on no broadcast, stand at no podium, pulpit, or lectern, sit at no reporter’s desk. No person or collective or corporate entity pays me to write about this or any other issue. Therefore I am not a recognized expert. This is a distinct disadvantage, particularly at this point in history.

We entered some time back the golden age of expert-ism. In that magical realm experts, fact-checkers, non-profit organizations, NGOs and all manner of assorted doers of good and guardians of the State or Satan or both, who are financially connected to and likewise dependent upon the very entities about which they daily issue forth, i.e., bloviate - around the clock - the preposterous fruit of their make believe knowledge. Yet these experts of all strains are regarded with varying degrees of respect and trust by the same populations that for decades have, as noted by Neil Postman and others, continued to value entertainment over discourse. So, by the flawed logic of this time and most of its occupants, I am not qualified to evaluate lofty esoteric subjects such as social engineering and mass psychosis even as I watch them daily unfold.

Of course no reasonable person would believe this. Formerly, in the days before this time of universal deceit, one became an expert, not by appearing on TV or acquiring a fan base or a Twitter following or make believe Facebook friends or any of the above, but by attaining knowledge. Before we entered the era of the professional expert, some of the greatest advances came to the world via devoted amateurs. Antonie van Leeuwenhoek, the “Father of Microbiology,” had no training in science or medicine. Another amateur, Joseph Niépce, produced photographs in the early 19^th century despite the fact that cameras did not previously exist. He also helped design one of the first internal combustion engines...or possibly the first such device. And Louis Pasteur, whether visionary or fraud was apparently at least a self taught one. Note to self: he was a fraud, while Antoine Bechamp was the genuine article, although recently inaugurated experts say otherwise.

This array of experts appear before us daily to scare us, besiege us, and to implore and demand that we trust...you guessed it...the experts. In this flickering quasi-reality, they tell us to trust the science of global warming/climate change, another fiction, like the coronavirus, akin to the monster in the closet and/or under the bed.

---

They tell us to believe in a unique and deadly disease, and then two or several or far too numerous to mention, the evidence of which was nothing more than a faulty test and a spiky computer graphic, a symbol (a logo) despite the fact that the process called photomicrography has existed for a century or so. It took that long or longer to reach a place and time wherein science became a matter of trusting and believing. But we are now here.

While on the subject of expert-ism allow me to divert your attention briefly to one of the experts at the National Institute of Standards and Technology (NIST). Architects and Engineers for 9/11 Truth recently published the first of a five part article about the physically impossible collapse nearly twenty one years ago of the Salomon Brothers building, aka WTC 7. The article focuses on the absurd reasoning used by NIST to explain away that impossibility. In a video clip within the article Dr. Shyam Sunder provides what, coming as is does from a “scientist,” is an amazing admonishment. “The public should really at this point, says Dr. Shyam, “recognize that science is really behind what we have said.” Two reallys in one sentence. The experts have spoken. It must really be true. He must really, really be a scientist. And an expert.

Early on in the A&E 9/11 Truth article, the author Ted Walter writes:

The thing is, in science we do not simply take people at their word. We judge scientific reports and articles on their merits — i.e., for their ability to explain all of the available evidence. No one should be told to “recognize” the validity of any scientific report. The report should speak for itself. 

Not to be outdone, the experts of the ASCE, The American Society of Civil Engineers has expressed their growing concern about and annoyance at pesky challengers of the official narrative. As always advancement opportunities and big bucks abound for those fortunate entities who are utterly devoid of ethics or decency.

A Funny Little Thing Called the Grievance Studies Hoax (or How to Fool the Experts Without Trying All That Hard)

In a sense there is nothing new here. For decades, centuries and millennia populations have been organized under and obedient to a pantheon of experts, of all manner of high priests and rulers, doctors, lawyers, and so-called leaders, many or most of whom were and are utter madmen and madwomen. These experts have imposed themselves upon us and interposed themselves between we the living and God.

It has been a process fraught with evil and peril from its origin, Satanic to its core, and is now a rudimentary fact of life. It’s a template used again and again, the template known as history, an ongoing and entirely false narrative peopled always by the many (the controlled populations) and the few (their controllers) repeated ceaselessly toward some final denouement. Brainwash, rinse and repeat.

In an article titled “The Failure of Peer Review – Especially in Medicine” Brendan D. Murphy addresses the problem of experts:

Peer review, [he states] as a "quasi-sacred" process that somehow supposedly transcends the foibles and follies of human nature, has taken on sacred ritual status. Has the paper been blessed by the Peer Review Priest? Peer review is held to be...a transcendent, almost magical, organizing force occurring in the heavenly ivory towers of Science, which somehow avoids falling prey to human weaknesses by virtue of those humans' lofty qualifications as "scientists" or "experts."

Scientists, of course, aren't quite human—they are something more, something pure, something that the lay person can never be. Students undergo a magical alchemical process as they proceed through educational institutions and emerge transformed from their chrysalis with their doctorates, masters, stethoscopes and equations, They do not have to answer to the lowly non-scientific peasantry—let alone unbelieving heretics. 

Mr. Murphy addresses in the article two particular instances of scientific papers that passed the so-called rigors of peer review. In the first of these hilarious and justifiably famous pin pricks to the overinflated balloon called academia, Alan Sokal managed to publish a whopper of a hoax/scientific paper bearing the following lofty title. “Transgressing the Boundaries: Toward a Transfomative Hermeneutics of Quatum Gravity.” The article appeared in the spring 1996 issue of the trendy cultural studies journal Social Text. That a scientific journal can be trendy, by the way, should give pause, or several pauses.

Two decades later, James Lindsay, Helen Pluckrose, and Peter Boghossian wrote 20 nonsensical articles rich with the jargon and research-ese of the time. The most famous of these was titled "The conceptual penis as social construct." In it Peter Boghossian (AKA Peter Boyle) and James Lindsay (AKA Jamie Lindsay) asserted the following:

Anatomical penises may exist, but as pre-operative trangendered women also have anatomical penises the penis vis-a-vis maleness is an incoherent construct. We argue that the conceptual penis is better understood not as an anatomical organ but as a social construct.

Mainstream sources such as the venerable New York Times and Slate claim that the authors of the hoax papers merely showed that they have a problem, a problem regarding gender. Those authors also published in “Gender, Place & Culture,” a journal focused on “feminist geography,” a paper in which they claimed to have spent a year observing canine sexual misconduct in Portland, Oregon parks. The the paper used chapter 12 of Mein Kamf, by Der Fuhrer himself, as a framework and bore the title “Our Struggle Is My Struggle: Solidarity Feminism as an Intersectional Reply to Neo-liberal and Choice Feminism.” The paper appeared in Affilia: Journal of Women and Social Work.

The author admits that “my own anthropocentric frame” makes it difficult to judge animal consent. Still, the paper claims dog parks are “petri dishes for canine ‘rape culture’ ” and issues “a call for awareness into the different ways dogs are treated on the basis of their gender and queering behaviors, and the chronic and perennial rape emergency dog parks pose to female dogs."

Incidentally, for others who still struggle with gender word protocols and are not yet properly gender literate, a handy guide compiled by gender fluent experts can be found in Teen Vogue. I consulted this handy compendium today and learned that I must never use the word ladies or gentlemen. I can still use the word everybody to indicate, well, everybody. But these language maniacs, I mean language purifiers, prefer the word folks, or even better, folx. Of course I inadvertently used the word maniac, which itself contains the offensive word “man.”

Invented Diseases Are Far from New: The Mad Myth Known as Mental Illness

Other experts of the same priest class that Murphy addressed, or rather a different branch or holy order thereof, has for decades produced, out of that same thin air that exists in the upper reaches of the ivory towers of psychiatry the Diagnostic and Statistical Manual of Mental Disorders. Were I ever assigned the task of assembling a list of books for summary burning that “manual” would share the top with its distant ancestor, the Malleus Maleficarum.

The DSM is the work of fiction from which prescription drugs and other “treatments” flow like manna from heaven. The current edition fattened a decade ago to more than a thousand pages of disorders, evidence of which is non-existent. By way of a remarkable coincidence (No sane person believes in conspiracy) these illnesses are “treatable” via dangerous man-made and, of course, patented drugs. Toxic medicine for nonexistent illness. Where have we heard this before?

Meanwhile, the brilliant, prolific and prescient Thomas Szasz fought tirelessly against the psychiatric establishment and the process by which they transformed “problems with living” into “medical” diagnoses. It was already a centuries old deception when in 1960 he published “The Myth of Mental Illness” and that myth remains both a deception and a profitable fiction. I find it interesting that the invention of the current non-existent plague occurred sixty years after Szasz’s book about the invention of “mental illness.”

One of Szasz’s last books, first published in 2001, ends with a chilling and prescient warning about the sordid place in history that has now arrived, the so called “new normal.” I use the term not to support that oft repeated demented thought but to address the linguistic absurdity of this time. Note the arrogance with which the powers that should not be declare and decree that the mass insanity of the moment is both normal and permanently established. Note too the hapless compliance of the millions and billions who accept this as an existential fact and the despair felt by those who know better.

In Pharmacracy Thomas Szasz addressed a moment that he posited but didn’t quite live to see. His warning about the depravity tersely named and massively marketed as “the new normal” and “the great reset” appears near the end of his book:

Formerly, people rushed to embrace totalitarian states. Now they rush to embrace the therapeutic state. When they discover that the therapeutic state is about tyranny, not therapy, it will be too late.

The diagnosing of fake psychiatric disorders and physical diseases that likewise don’t exist has continued unabated for three centuries, five or so more if we count the Inquisition. It was eventually deemed desirable and profitable to chemically poison (and otherwise abuse and destroy) well people whom the high priests of psychiatry declared ill, and this has gone on unabated for three quarters of a century, give or take a few years. Once populations accepted that bit of sorcery, the injecting of additional millions or billions with syringes filled with unknown substances became pretty much a wretched inevitability. It’s easy to see, but horrifying to accept, where this is obviously going.

History and hysteria are endlessly repetitive because the same force lies behind all historical iterations. That force is now poised to do what it has aspired to do through the millennia. It has always existed, or at least has existed for a few thousand years. The motive was there but not the means. Now the means exists. That means is technology. Technology is both Mammon and a tool thereof and the same ninety-nine percent of the first world now worship it and remain daily hypnotized by it. So both it and the time are ripe. Homo sapiens, most of whom remain utterly unaware of this, are fast becoming inviable.

Here’s the rub: the aforementioned rulers and high priests would not wield power, at least not in a truly sane world. They would instead be locked away, quarantined to use one of their favorite new terms. There, on an island, perhaps with Jeffrey Epstein as their host, they would remain the ludicrous and pathetic creatures they truly are but for the power rendered unto them by the billions of diligent order followers.

This is how the current evil was accomplished. This is how evil has always been achieved. I should know. I happen to be a ponerologist, an expert in the field as a matter of fact. Ponerology, for those who don’t know, is the study of evil. I take that back. I’m not an expert. I do not possess a document stating that I am an expert ponerologist. I am not paid to be a ponerologist. I have never been on CNN or Fox News or the BBC with the word ponerologist glowing under my alternately smiling and stern face. Therefore I am not an expert anything. Forget what I said. But remember it anyway.

When you remove the rhetoric, the idealistic posturing and the endless fear-mongering that government has as its raison d’etre and primary method of control, government is simply a constantly growing pathology. Choosing this or that political candidate and literally becoming emotionally and psychologically invested in this or that self-serving psychopath (or philanthropath) is, for lack of a more nuanced term, insane. It is the equivalent of choosing which form of cancer treatment you’d like to kill you. A reasonable person would say what the existentialist hero Bartleby said: “I’d prefer not to.” He or she would say thanks but no thanks, close but no cigar. I’d rather not put myself in the blood-stained hands of the powers that should not be, who have diligently maintained for over a century the cash cow called cancer while simultaneously pretending to be at war with and battling it. They would only do their best, meaning their worst, and add me to the millions they have already debilitated, maimed and killed.

Why is medical genocide happening and why do only a few see this? The answer is as clear to the few as it is impossible for the many to grasp. It’s happening because the most important quality for avoiding human extinction is, for all practical purposes, likewise extinct. Whether it vanished by mere atrophy or was extinguished by design or both, I can’t say. I only know that quality is for the most part sadly absent and perhaps gone for good. It isn't love, it isn't virtue, although there's now plenty of signaling thereof to be had. And it isn’t the profit motive that drives modern men and women and all the assorted new genders to succeed and/or achieve fame and in any case accrue lots of money. Those qualities are very much present. What’s largely absent now is discernment.

We Are Here: This Is No Dream, This Is Really Happening

“Why do so many doubt science?” the mainstream reporters daily ask. Accusations of science “doubt” and science “denial,” are made by the repeaters [sic] running the dog and pony show some call journalism and the experts that they pretend to interview. Those, no matter how few, who resist this influence and retain the ability to reason, know better. They refuse to trust the experts.

Discernment, the ability to apply keen perception or judgment, to have and express insight, to have acumen, all the preceding, is all but gone at this point. The mindless majority have been rendered terrified of a specific singular and unique illness (and later variants thereof) that has never been proven to exist. This is a lack of discernment hitherto not achieved. That same majority continues to invest belief in, and engages in endless petty disputes about, political parties and political candidates. In the process it fails to notice that through the centuries the superstitious belief in governance itself was and remains the only political issue. The seemingly endless iterations of government forms, all of which have tyranny as their only and always unstated goal, is only increasingly bad theater, albeit with better production quality.

The willingness of populations to designate to governments the authority, meaning nothing less than the ability to use coercion and physical violence, to accomplish a great many things that individual mere mortals would not morally and could not legally do has brought us here. This distorted worldview has kept huge collectives of homo sapiens through the ages in a state of voluntary servitude. Anyone who hasn’t needs to read Etienne de La Boetie’s essay about same or its contemporary counterpart The Most Dangerous Superstition by Larken Rose.

I’ve read of a time and place called the Dark Ages. Given the track record of recorded history I have no idea what, if anything, about that time and place is real or true. I’ll posit that there has now arrived an era and circumstance that warrant this name. My claim, even if only a metaphor, remains an apt one: we are living now in Dark Ages, the Sequel.

History repeats itself, we’re told, first as tragedy and later as farce. This new version, this ongoing farce, was made possible through and is powered by advanced technology, the unremitting worship thereof, the lack of vigilance regarding its mental and physical hazards, and, again, a nearly complete and universal lack of discernment. This “belief” in the television show has achieved absolute supremacy. Millions cue up for dangerous injections to prevent a non-existent pathology. The ADL has conveniently forgotten about (and most Americans never knew about) the Neo-Nazis in the Ukraine. A made for TV school shooting movie (there have been many since Sandy Hook) last week becomes new legislation this week. More variations on this theme are coming soon.

Although a surprising number have failed to notice, as a surprising number always will, we have arrived. Dystopian warnings have become dystopian routine realities and conspiracy theories remain facts. Orwell issued cogent warnings about this era we long ago entered, this among them: “In a time of universal deceit telling the truth is a revolutionary act.” That time, toiled upon for centuries, now appears to be a fully completed work, a magnum opus, a fait accompli. The ninety-nine percent movement of a decade ago, whether real or imagined, grass roots or AstroTurf, has vanished, only to be replaced by a population of the same magnitude. That population fully believes that reality and the 24 hour per day movie it watches are one and the same. This curious belief has brought us here. It could lead nowhere else.

Eunomia was the goddess of good order and lawful conduct. She was in charge of the enactment of good laws (This implies, at least to me, natural law) and the maintenance of civil order. She was also the spring-time goddess of green pastures. Eunomia was one of the Horai, goddesses of the seasons and keepers of the gates of heaven. As far as I know, there was no god or goddess in charge of inventing disease. That perversity arrived much later. And now, unfortunately, we are here. “This is no dream,” cried Rosemary Woodhouse, “this is really happening.” And her son and his myriad followers are just warming up. If the devil has his way, Bob Dylan’s decades old lyric will be the theme of this epoch: “There are no truths outside the Gates of Eden.”