RE: Legacy media & Poilievre derangement syndrome

Their reaction was inevitable. It is the inescapable outcome of WOKE ideologues being confronted with reality. The shock and horror they are expressing is the result of Pierre Poilievre having had the temerity to state obvious facts. Facts like less government equals more freedom. Our State funded media propaganda machine demands absolute conformity to a State mandated social consensus. We need to sever the connection between media and politicians so that never again will "news" serve to further the government’s illiberal agenda!

The legacy media’s nonsensical rhetoric flies in the face of their constant insults to the traditional values that average Canadian still holds dear. In this regard to further their radical agenda there is no unfounded delusion they won't repeat as though it were fact! If we needed further proof government funded media is a mere propagandizing weapon of disinformation, then Poilievre derangement syndrome provides said proof!

The reason radicals in media favour the radicals in government is that they both promote the same radical agenda. Asking them why they are doing this fails to recognize who and what they are. Have you ever heard of Nazis and Communists admitting that their toxic ideology was and remains a complete tyrannical failure? Everything radicals do is done to further their version of a cultural revolution. Therefore, it is the job of all who love freedom, the Rule of Law, and Constitutionally limited government under proper parliamentary oversight to demonstrate that these folks are revolutionaries driven by pathological narcissism. We need to expose the source of the ideology which motivates them while explaining to the broader public why our way of life is under attack from radicals who have a revolutionary agenda! 

Why it is foolish to play whack-a-mole with the Devil: 

Pointing out that the legacy media’s narrative has been self-contradictory is useless, since believe it or not they do that deliberately. Rather go to the heart of the matter by demonstrating where their ideology originates and what its stated goals are. And that at the heart of their constant harping of redistribution of wealth and resource lies the belief that life is essentially a zero-sum game.

The zero-sum game of political narcissists and its psychological imbalance:

Although it sounds utterly fantastic that one can deny the evidence of their own eyes, ears, smell, taste, touch, and all that we know of the use of human reason, yes, just because this seems fantastic and therefore incomprehensible does not mean that this incredible behaviour is not a readily identifiable psychological phenomenon. Let us examine their tactics to rid ourselves of any naivety regarding what we can expect from them as we attack the sources of their mental pathogens, and I quote;

“Because of their personality disorder, narcissists tend to live life as a zero-sum game in which there are only winners and losers in any interaction or relationship.

Terrified of feeling like or being viewed as a “loser,” narcissists use numerous approaches designed to devalue, minimize, and control other people. Many of these tactics come naturally to narcissists and may be hard to spot.

8 of narcissists’ most potent tactics:

When dealing with narcissistic people, forewarned is forearmed.

1. Labeling

Narcissists love labels. Knowing that uttering a single word may temporarily reduce another’s sense of self or silence another can feel incredibly powerful for a narcissist. Examples include calling another person “loser,” “failure,” “stupid,” “weak,” or “needy.”

Ironically, narcissists’ labels reveal more about the narcissist than their target. One hallmark of narcissism is the frequent use of the defense mechanism of projection. Projection is when we unconsciously attribute to others feelings and judgments that we cannot tolerate recognizing within ourselves. Narcissists’ most-used labels tend to show their deepest fears about themselves.

For example, if “stupid” is a narcissist’s go-to label, it may indicate how desperate they are to feel smart, often in response to deep fears of being inadequate.

Or narcissists who love to call others “weak” may reveal their fear that not being strong would expose them to mortal danger.

2. Displacing

When we ignore or flee from unpleasant feelings, they may emerge indirectly as disowned aspects of ourselves. Narcissists have little tolerance for painful emotions. As a result, they tend to offload uncomfortable feelings on those around them.

For example, narcissists tend to carry a great deal of shame, but it is rarely in their conscious awareness. Instead, they displace their shame on others by trying to make others feel inferior and “carry” the narcissist’s shame for them.

For example, narcissists’ fears of being illegitimate may lead them to question others’ legitimacy. Their fear of being flawed can emerge as harping on another’s small misstep in an otherwise exemplary performance.

3. Exaggerating

Narcissistic Personality Disorder is characterized by distorted views of self, others, and the world. Given narcissists’ tendencies toward grandiosity, exaggerating is second nature to narcissists. Thus, narcissists’ looks, accomplishments, and possessions are the “greatest,” “perfect,” and “the best.”

Narcissists’ tendency to exaggerate works in reverse when applied to others. Narcissists may tell you that your comment was “the dumbest thing I’ve ever heard,” your outfit is “the ugliest,” or your performance was “the worst in history.”

4. Stonewalling

Narcissists have found that never backing down, even when they are wrong, can be a winning tactic. When faced with a narcissist’s persistent stonewalling, other people may simply give up and allow the narcissist to do whatever they want, much to the narcissist’s delight.

5. Scapegoating

Narcissists often blame one individual for a group’s problems. In doing so, they gain power, evade any responsibility they have in creating problems, and ostracize their target, which serves as a warning to others who might think of challenging the narcissist.

6. Intimidating

Narcissists tend to be bullies. They try to get what they want through verbal, psychological, or emotional brute force.

It is important to recognize intimidation and abuse. As the saying goes, “If you see something, say something.” Remember: Intimidation or threatening others is illegal in most places.

7. Gaslighting

Narcissists will deny what you know to be true in an attempt to destabilize you. For example, a narcissist may take something that belongs to you right before your eyes, but when you bring it up, deny that it happened. They will insist you are imagining things, denying all evidence to the contrary. The longer this gaslighting goes on, the more self-doubt you may feel about your perceptions.

8. Dehumanizing

Much like authoritarian regimes, narcissists classify others as inferior, unworthy, or evil to justify oppressing or attacking them. They may devalue you through dismissive remarks or hostile humor or treat you as “other,” seeking to make you feel subhuman and alone.

While we can have compassion for anyone suffering from a personality disorder or unhealthy narcissism, we do not have to accept destructive manipulative or controlling behavior from anyone. You have the right to be abuse-free in your personal and work life. Stand up for that right.

Copyright © 2021 Dan Neuharth Ph.D., MFT

https://www.psychologytoday.com/us/blog/narcissism-demystified/202109/8-ways-narcissists-seek-manipulate-and-dehumanize-you

And what was the phrase which Pierre used to send the legacy media and the government into paroxysm of writhing horror? Why personal autonomy and accountability, for its personal agency they detest since it limits their hold over us. It’s the identical reason that the legacy media loathes and mischaracterises Dr. Jordan B. Peterson. Both these men are advocates of personal agency, autonomy, and responsibility. Which an idea which once lay at the heart of the very concept of being a rugged Canadian individual, who was a hearty pioneer who forged ahead despite all life’s unfairness and vicissitudes for they are realities that all the self-entitled narcissism in the world cannot dismiss, assuage, or prevent.

Therefore Pierre Poilievre 's next challenge isn't merely defeating Trudeau's government in the next election, whenever that may be, his real challenge lies in defeating the toxic mindset of Woke ideology which has permeated the nation. An ideology which has absolutely captivated the pathological narcissists which inhabit both government and its lapdog the legacy media. We need to sever their narcissistic supply once and for all. May God Himself rid this nation of the curse of Postmodern Woke ideology which is poisoning the well of our democracy to return us to being the True North Strong and Free! And may Canadians never forget the abuse we have suffered at the hands of an arrogant, prideful class of Besserwissers who view us as a "fringe element holding unacceptable views" because the views that we cherish are the very traditions upon which this nation was founded under God!

My thoughts on the passing of Queen Elizabeth II: Are Monarchy and liberty incompatible?

 

It's interesting to note I'm reading the same level of vitriol from libertarians who have no understanding of the long history of the Rule of English Common Law and therefore the value of a head of state detached from the political process. The Westminster Parliamentary System has resulted in creating some of the most successful governments on earth and when rights are challenged it is the very system that you're trashing which holds the key to restoring liberty under law.

 

In this those who claim to want liberty disembodied from the traditions under which it evolved share the identical delusion that socialists labour under, namely an idealized utopia which has never existed. Not only has such utopian ideology never created utopia (which is Greek for no place) every time it was attempted it created tyranny and social ruin. And one further thought, those who advocate such things never define in practice how their utopian vision will work outside of our current legal, constitutional, and parliamentary system which is based upon having a monarch as symbolic head of state representing our inherent rights, liberties, and courts of justice.

 

Since the Westminster Parliamentary System is the one we inherited let’s examine its achievements in creating the most successful and stable democracies the world has ever known. Dominions which encircle the globe that have provided the most functional responsible governments which have ever blessed mankind. And let me state the following clearly, the first to recognize that slavery was not an acceptable institution and plied the high seas at great expense to mother country to end it. Let’s be clear, slavery is an institution which still exists with an estimated thirty million people still living in bondage. And where does this bondage exist in its worst forms? Why under communist socialism where human beings are being used as organ harvesting platforms in CCP led China.

 

The City of St. Catharines was the final terminus on the Underground Railroad for hundreds of people fleeing slavery in the 1820s. The Underground Railroad and Niagara's Freedom Trail was a network of people who hid and guided enslaved black people who were leaving the United States and heading to British North America to seek freedom.

 

Harriet Tubman and abolition:

The railroad began at the “The Crossing,” which is located along the Niagara River by historic Fort Erie and ends at the British Methodist Episcopal Church, Salem Chapel. Harriet Tubman, an important Underground Railroad conductor and abolitionist attended this chapel which became an important space for early abolitionist activity in British North America. Tubman remained in St. Catharines for 10 years where she worked as an abolitionist and helped former enslaved people adjust to their new life.

 

William Hamilton Merritt, prominent businessmen and abolitionist, helped the new citizens purchase land to build the British Methodist Episcopal Church, Salem Chapel and later the Zion Baptist Church.

https://www.stcatharines.ca/en/arts-culture-and-events/the-underground-railroad.aspx

 

Ignorance of history not only destines us to repeat past mistakes, it demonstrates unforgivable laziness in an age when historical resources are available on-line. If we hope to advance the cause of responsible government ignorance will not serve our cause. These advances were made possible by famous jurists who had paved the way for universal recognition of liberty under law and universal suffrage.

2 Timothy 2:15 "Study to show thyself approved unto God, a workman that needeth not to be ashamed, rightly dividing the word of truth."

 

Why we are getting our definitions of political and philosophical leanings incorrect:

The left-right political divide originated during the time of the French Revolution. To the right of the King (today's executive branch) sat those who believed the King had the right to veto acts of parliament while to the King's left sat those who believed that Parliament had the right to veto the King. Over many centuries Britain evolved the Westminster System to designate an almost purely symbolic role for its Monarch, which I deem to be essential to our system of governance. Magna Carta has had far reaching impact in this evolutionary process of limited government.

 

Sir Edward Coke of “Magna Carta is such a fellow that he will have no sovereign” fame explains one of the key sections of Magna Carta on English liberties (1642).

 

Sir Edward Coke:

Found in Selected Writings of Sir Edward Coke, vol. II

 

The English judge and Member of Parliament Sir Edward Coke (1552-1634) spelled out the full meaning of what it meant to have “English liberties.” Because he believed that “the liberty of a man’s person is more precious to him, then all the rest that follow” he listed the nine “branches” which made up the “tree of liberty” as understood in the mid-17th century:

 

Upon this Chapter [29] of Magna Carta, as out of a roote, many fruitfull branches of the Law of England have sprung…

 

This Chapter containeth nine severall branches.

 

1.    That no man be taken or imprisoned, but per legem terrae, that is, by the Common Law, Statute Law, or Custome of England; for these words, Per legem terrae, being towards the end of this Chapter, doe referre to all the precedent matters in this Chapter, and this hath the first place, because the liberty of a mans person is more precious to him, then all the rest that follow, and therefore it is great reason, that he should by Law be relieved therein, if he be wronged, as hereafter shall be shewed.

2.    No man shall be disseised, that is, put out of seison, or dispossessed of his free-hold (that is) lands, or livelihood, or of his liberties, or free customes, that is, of such franchises, and freedomes, and free customes, as belong to him by his free birth-right, unlesse it be by the lawfull judgement, that is, verdict of his equals (that is, of men of his own condition) or by the Law of the Land (that is, to speak it once for all) by the due course, and processe of Law.

3.    No man shall be out-lawed, made an exlex, put out of the Law, that is, deprived of the benefit of the Law, unlesse he be out-lawed according to the Law of the Land.

4.    No man shall be exiled, or banished out of his Country, that is, Nemo perdet patriam, no man shall lose his Country, unlesse he be exiled according to the Law of the Land.

5.    No man shall be in any sort destroyed (Destruere. i. quod prius structum, & factum fuit, penitus evertere & diruere) unlesse it be by the verdict of his equals, or according to the Law of the Land.

6.    No man shall be condemned at the Kings suite, either before the King in his Bench, where the Pleas are Coram Rege, (and so are the words, Nec super eum ibimus, to be understood) nor before any other Commissioner, or Judge whatsoever, and so are the words, Nec super eum mittemus, to be understood, but by the judgement of his Peers, that is, equalls, or according to the Law of the Land.

7.    We shall sell to no man Justice or Right.

8.    We shall deny to no man Justice or Right.

9.    We shall defer to no man Justice or Right.

 

Sir Edward Coke wrote a voluminous set of glosses on aspects of English law known as The Institutes. In this case, The Second Part of the Institutes, he glosses the meaning of the Great Charter (Magna Carta) of 1215. It elaborated in considerable detail the foundation upon which “English liberties” rested. It was not published until 1642, some 8 years after his death, but just in time to become part of the intellectual ammunition used by opponents of the Monarchy during the English civil war and revolution during the 1640s and 1650s. This quotation comes from chapter 29 on the section entitled “No Freeman shall be taken or imprisoned, or be disseised of his Freehold, or Liberties … but by lawful judgment of his Peers, or by the Law of the Land.” To Coke, this was the “root” from which sprang many “branches” of English law regarding individual liberty. One can imagine John Lilburne reading from this passage in his successful defence in his trial for treason in 1649. The jury of his peers acquitted him of all charges.

https://oll.libertyfund.org/quote/sir-edward-coke-explains-one-of-the-key-sections-of-magna-carta-on-english-liberties-1642

 

Only an ignorant fool would or could wish to ignore these traditions and the long history of the evolution of our Rule of Law. Her late Majesty had 15 Prime Ministers during her reign all of whom benefited from her advice and careful guidance. But what does this mean to us today? Since we choose to describe politics as left vs right we need to admit that those who claim to be leftists are actually extreme right wing authoritarians who want the executive to be able to veto parliament. This places them to the right of the King making Justin Trudeau an extreme right wing fanatic. This has been demonstrated clearly during COVID with Justin Trudeau suspending parliamentary oversight of government while giving himself unconstitutional powers to ignore the will of the people and their parliament!

 

Classical liberals in the English sense recognize the importance of the symbolic in government. Since Her late Majesty’s passing, I have read libertarians spewing the most vile and loathsome nonsense about Her and the role of the monarch in our Westminster version of limited, constitutional, parliamentary democracy without ever suggesting by what process we would be able to replace our system and what that new form of government would look like. It appears to me that libertarians despise the Rule of English Common Law which is arguably one of our greatest inheritances. It is the very reason that Lieutenant Governor Simcoe was appointed to the newly separated province of Upper Canada in the 1790's since the American Loyalists who lost their land in the states did not want to live under French Civil Law which Lower Canada had at that time and indeed still has today.

 

If we are to hope for greater liberty under law by ignoring the traditions which has created the most successful democracies on earth, we are merely deluding ourselves. For libertarians to assert they have something better than our admittedly flawed system of government without having a single example of the form of government they advocate ever having existed shares a similar delusion that leads radical socialists to claim that communism has never been tried is spite of all its tyranny and failures. So, if you hope to increase liberty here in Canada, I strongly advise a little gratitude for those who struggled mightily within the Westminster System to apply Magna Carta to all men by reminding our illiberal and authoritarian government that Magna Carta is such a fellow as will have no sovereign. We have much work to do but that work will not be accomplished by tearing down. It can only be furthered by building on the millennia old foundations which began in the times of Witan and Ting on to the modern Westminster System which exist throughout the Commonwealth today. After all we have a common enemy, namely those who have the temerity to believe they are sovereign to Magna Carta! It will be more than sufficient for us to remind them on no uncertain terms that no one is above the Grand Charter and that the Rule of Law must apply equally to all!

A word of warning to parents: They've come for your children

Why I believe we have abandoned our children and our sacred duty to them by allowing them to become wards of the Postmodern State: 

“All tyrannies rule through fraud and force, but once the fraud is exposed they must rely exclusively on force.” ― George Orwell

Facts simply do not matter to Postmodernists, and its bastard cousins the Cultural Marxists, since they're only dedicated to promoting a narrative which furthers their cultural revolution. Which is why any attempt to demonstrate their ideology is based upon obvious untruths will result in narcissistic projection, denial, and rage. Look at the narcissistic projection behind the pillorying and vilifying of such notable academics as Dr. Gad Saad, Dr. Julie Ponesse, and Dr. Jordan B. Peterson, just to name a few, whose sole sin has been to expose the ideological biases prevalent in the Academy.

Which is why it's foolish for conservatives and libertarians to attack radical policies since radicals are constantly inventing new ones based upon Marxist fantasies. Rather I prefer to go straight to the ideology which possesses them. And believe me, they are possessed by idea pathogens. Their adherence to mere dogma has become a replacement for religion, a religion which has no factual basis and no historical validity. They're the reincarnation of Eric Clapton's Blind Faith with Marshall stacks dialed up to 12 to drown out the cognitive dissonance.

RE: Postmodernism, Cultural Marxism, and the humanities:

I am astounded that most parents are unaware that our universities are teaching our children not to become individuals. That they are telling our children that they're not autonomous beings capable of individual thought and action, but merely an extension of the collective. I'm also appalled that anyone who listens to their professor’s Neo-Marxist drivel wouldn't react violently against this attempt at indoctrination. The most important thing to me when I was young was to develop my own unique sense of self identity. My parents and my teachers tried to force me into their own preconceived mold, yet I rebelled relentlessly. I never wanted to be anyone but me. What makes a human being think that they should surrender their autonomy and individuality at the door of the lecture hall to be rendered into a flavourless soup? That and the fact that there's not a single politician talking about the toxic social collectivist ideology being taught in our universities at the taxpayer’s expense. There's not been a moment spent on the floors of parliament provincially or federally to discuss this hideous nonsense and the enormous expenditure of resources used to promulgate it. As I mentioned previously, I have subscribed to Academia.edu from which I receive academic papers on Cultural Marxist theory. I don't open every one of the papers I receive in my inbox, but I do sample their content from time to time so that I may speak intelligently about Postmodern and Neo-Marxist theory. Why would I, other than to inform myself to give the devil his due? So no, it's not a lot of work as my friend John Rebelo stated, rather it provokes rage in me. I rage against the darkness that is closing in on all of us, in particular this hideous cultural assault directed at our children! It's perverse and unnatural that I have no words to define how ugly it is! 

So, the Neo-Marxist Cultural Revolution proceeds unabated despite all the evidence of the failures and tyranny of social collectivism. Yet the Postmodernists appear to be winning even as society embraces this toxic ideology. Yet many still have the temerity to wonder why we are faced with social and economic ruin! Which leads to me to this conclusion regarding the psychology of those who fall prey to this idea pathogens.

We elect psychopaths to govern us:

I can't believe how incredibly narcissistic one would need to be to believe that their knowledge of systems of infinite complexity are sufficient for them to make statements about wanting to change the world when they aren't even capable of changing themselves. The constant meddling and deconstructing of systems which took millennia to evolve are being torn down before our very eyes by fools whose sole achievement is deconstructing the very things which they ought to be building up! Like our oil and gas sector under proper parliamentary oversight which will truly respond to the democratic will of the people!

Pathological leaders are completely incapable of understanding the principles of democracy, as they see themselves as superior and life as a competitive battle where the most ruthless deserve to dominate others. Once in power, they do their utmost to dismantle or discredit democratic institutions, including the freedom and legitimacy of the press independent of State control.

In other words, electing narcissists and psychopaths to public office is tantamount to national hara-kiri, the ritualized act of self-annihilation, self-destruction, and suicide. It signals the demise of democracy and lays the foundation for a totalitarian regime that is legalistic, militaristic, inflexible, intolerant and inhumane.

The kind of individuals who want power the most, the most ruthless and unempathetic, are the ones who shouldn't have power at all. All potential leaders and members of a government should be thoroughly examined and tested by psychologists to determine whether they have one or more personality disorders, thereby determining their fitness for power.

I believe it was the elite's plan all along to create generations of humanoid automatons who have had the ability to question authority driven out of them to ensure their blind conformity to the dictates of the State.

Every single hideous idea poisoning society today has originated from radical social collectivism in the Academy. Every single policy which emanates from these Postmodernists and Cultural Marxists has resulted in them demanding that the executive branch of government be granted arbitrary powers to use force to promulgate their toxic ideology. And the way this was forced upon us began in the Germanic school system modelled by North American "educators" who took tiny tots away from their parents to turn them into wards of the State! K to 12 is where this social engineering begins. It's time to deconstruct the toxic environment our children are forced into by returning our education system to the control of the parents and away from ideologically possessed teachers, the teachers’ unions, and Big Government. Since at present we are permitting our children's minds and hearts to be poisoned with toxic notions of gender fluidity and pernicious claims that our society is essentially a patriarchal tyranny!

Be prepared for narcissistic rage as we tackle this most vital of all issues: 

When we hold a narcissist accountable for their behaviour we must prepare for a flood of denial and projection. Invariably this will result in the narcissist pinning the tail on the donkey who dared to point out how their behaviour affects us and rage over the fact that we are refusing to provide them with further narcissistic supply sufficient to sustain their self-delusion. Our children have been under assault while we have slept blindly trusting that those whom we have elected and entrusted to care for them actually had their best interests at heart. Spoiler alert: ideologically possessed narcissists are power mongers who need to have their narcissistic supply surgically removed. It will be insufficient merely to remove corrupt politicians and their bureaucratic minions from office. And it won’t be enough to remove toxic Neo-Marxist professors from the Academy. First and foremost, we must admit to ourselves that we have allowed this to happen. That we stood by and did nothing while every sacred institution upon which our democracy depends was corrupted and contaminated by radical Neo-Marxist ideology. We must not merely demand that our institutions be rid of this nefarious ideology, we must pray since we need God to restore order to our broken land, and as the song says:

LET YOUR JUSTICE ROLL LIKE RIVERS DEEP

LET YOUR MERCY FLOW LIKE HEALING STREAMS

LET YOUR RIGHTEOUSNESS POUR FROM YOUR THRONE

LET JUSTICE ROLL, LET JUSTICE ROLL

It brings life everlasting,

Gives beauty for our scars,

Replaces fear with courage

Chases away the dark,

Transforming what was hopeless into victory,

It makes the lame start dancing,

It sets the prisoners free,

Oh, hear them sing,

Let justice roll, let it roll through me

Let mercy flow, let it flow through me

Let righteousness, let it pour through me

Let justice roll, let justice roll

Critical Theory at York: listen to this bafflegab being taught to your kids with our tax dollars

 Please tell me what this means, I am too stupid to understand!

What did he just say? A test, listen to the toxic bafflegab being fed to our kids at York University paid for with our taxes. In my podcast you can see clearly hear the toxic nature of social collectivism. This article is only one of hundreds I receive in my inbox daily. To think that we are paying for this toxic mind meld with our taxes is galling. It's time we write our MP's and MPP's to demand defunding of the Academy!

https://www.academia.edu/38495525/Serious_not_all_that_serious_Utopia_beyond_realism_and_normativity_in_contemporary_Critical_Theory_in_Constellations_?email_work_card=title&fbclid=IwAR04Kml2SuUmHCY9jodvOg5_sS5SC96Zv0mRlFhMKZrzVcpimsi-J53x8lE

Mislabelling ourselves doesn't serve the cause: why the left vs right political divide is inaccurate

 It was in revolutionary France that the left vs right political divide was first defined. On the left were those who believed that the legislature had the right to veto the arbitrary dictates of the King, or executive branch of government, while on the right sat those who believed that the King, or the executive branch, had the right to veto the legislature. Today we can see, as we do with many things in this Postmodern world, this scenario reversed. Those who believe in parliamentary oversight are now those who are labelled as right wing while those who favour giving dictatorial powers to the executive sit on the left. This Postmodern deconstruction of the actual meaning of words has led to total confusion in this current “Tower of Babel” governmental structure where the State is attempting to build a totalitarian system which reaches unto heaven by denying the very existence of the Divine and the limited nature of our own knowledge.

So, my point is that those of us who believe in limited government with constitutional and parliamentary restraints on the power of the executive are allowing ourselves to be mislabelled. It only serves the cause of social collectivists to allow ourselves to be labelled as right-wingers when we are not. Therefore, we have ceded the narrative to the Postmodern types since it is they who exist on the right along with Fascists, and Marxists. Worse, I am seeing us play whack-a-mole with radicals as we attack every new policy they use as an excuse to garner more arbitrary power while increasing taxation. Face it, if you hope to kill a poisonous snake it is necessary to decapitate it while ensuring that in its death throes it cannot sink its poisonous fangs into us. But how to cut the head off this snake since its poisonous ideology has tainted our governments, our education systems, the arts, and every institution required for limited constitutional government to function?

First, we need to identify and understand our own philosophical position. I listen to alternative media daily and am constantly disappointed with the shallowness of the content due to the fact it is invariably a negation of the other’s position without ever defining the solution to our philosophical dilemma. Most conservative and classical liberal/libertarian podcasts focus on the myriad of missteps made by their opponents without ever positing a viable solution. I find myself wondering what the actual point is that they’re making? They appear to err in the same manner that their opponents err; they place both the blame and the solution to problems we face outside of themselves. “If only we elected the right people, our problems would disappear”, is the thinking of a five-year-old who still believes that his parents are super-human. That and the fact that this idiotic assumption has never worked and has led to our current dilemma proves my point. This ultimately leads to desperation due to a sense of powerlessness. The reality is that every problem begins and ends within each of us. If we are not able to define why we hold to certain principles, then we too are merely dogmatic in our beliefs. It is for this reason I have trouble with some Christians who believe that they have God in a box simply because they believe all the right things. Yet when one gets to know these folks, and I know them personally, the transformation required for them to be making such claims is absent in their lives. In this they share the same dogmatic failings as radical socialists since they believe the dogma they have been fed despite all evidence to the contrary simply because political correctness demands they all follow the same ideology without any demonstrable proof of its validity.

So, how to deal with the head of this serpent of deceit? First of all stop playing whack-a-mole with your ideological opponents. It has become abundantly obvious that our competing ideologies have become so polarized that they cannot peacefully coexist. Winning hearts and minds must deal with the most fundamental issue lying at the heart of this great debate, namely the individual. Social collectivists are rejecting their own sovereignty. They are negating their own Divine calling by refusing to become autonomous and self realized individuals. Only childish folk look outside of themselves to a nanny state to fulfill their needs. It is high time we call others to the full realization of adulthood and self reliance found in maturity. Christ’s own ministry was intensely personal. The individual nature of the path of the Cross can only be walked by one, namely any one of us who dares to walk that path for themselves. And as for the snake, God said to the Devil in Genesis 3:15; “And I will put enmity between you and the woman, and between your offspring and hers; he will crush your head, and you will strike his heel.” 

Oh, he may strike at our heels alright but stating the truth to the deceived is guaranteed to crush the head of the snake!

Left brain fantasies and postmodernism

 

Someone must help me with the following conundrum. Where did the idea originate that if we have a problem that the government ought to solve it? This belief invariably results in creating a far greater problem than the one the government allegedly intended to solve. Why is it that I so seldom hear, “I want the government to get the hell out of my life”? I prefer to solve my own problems, thank you very much! Despite the overwhelming evidence of the failure of state mandated solutions people still refuse to act as autonomous agents of self determination.

 

I'm a Classical Liberal in the English sense and as such I am of the opinion, that I have no right or expertise to tell others how to live. Which is why I believe in the free market of production, sales, resource distribution, and most of all, of ideas. It is historically provable that free markets and open competition without state interference outperform all other economic and philosophical systems.

 

But now I will attempt to answer my own rhetorical question regarding why folk still believe the state is capable of solving problems that it most likely helped to create. The reason the left demands managed and controlled markets, which include controlling ideas, is due to their attachment to a mechanistic view of the world. They have rejected the gestalt which can only occur in the right hemisphere of our brains where the perception of the world around us is living, vibrant, and changing while imbuing life with meaning. It is the right-brain which is responsible for creativity, and as importantly, our intuition. Which is why the Postmodern left claims that their opponents are conspiracy theorists even when the weight of evidence proves a mechanistic view of the world is unrealistic. It's also why the left thinks that they can control everything around them including people, the economy, resource distribution, and the environment. These delusions are the direct result of a right-brain deficit disorder shared by collectivist societies which have rejected individualism.

 

And I ain't about to go Borg. Resistance is NEVER futile. Resisting evil and pursuing higher good is, or at least ought to be, the most vital of all human endeavors. But let us examine why such a mechanistic world view is unscientific. Newtonian Physics provided mankind with a very certain and mechanistic model for how the world operates. 19^th Century man became convinced that science would soon explain all the mysteries of how the universe operates. But then came a discovery that soon upset the applecart, namely Quantum Mechanics.

 

“Quantum Mechanics formulations started in the early 1900s and the caught the eye of physicists around the world, with more and more acceptability being given to it. The Copenhagen Interpretation by Niels Bohr and Heisenberg in 1925-27 is the widely accepted form of quantum mechanics. It has changed the very nature of physics and it has radically changed our understanding of the universe and our place in it.

 

Quantum Mechanics ushered in the era of the "participatory universe" where the observer, the observed and the act of observation all are interlinked. This shattered the ideas of classical physics, where an independent observer can observe the universe independently and understand it. According to Quantum Mechanics, the observer is affecting the universe by the mere act of observation and affects not only the present but the past as well, thereby changing our notion of the linearity of time.

 

So, we can no longer think of the universe from the point of view of independent observation; it is not independent (each part of the universe is connected to each other) and we are not independent observers. Rather we shape the universe by our observation and action.”

https://www.enotes.com/homework-help/how-has-field-quantum-mechanics-changed-our-475863

 

Furthermore, Quantum Mechanics demands imagination, something that the left-brain which behaves as a high functioning bureaucrat simply cannot grasp. Engels and Marx theory was the result of a completely mechanistic left-brain view of the world indicative of the 19^th Century in which they lived. It also relies on the idea that human beings are born into this world as Tabula Rasa “blank slates” who therefore may have anything written on them. The radical left believes that all human behaviour, beliefs, morays, morals, and culture are mere social constructs which may be altered at will via social engineering. These ideas have proven to be false on several fronts, partly as a result of work done in evolutionary psychology, Jungian psychology, and certainly in physics where Quantum Mechanics have scientifically demonstrated the shortcomings of Newtonian Physics.

 

The greatest scientific discoveries resulted from imagining first then testing the hypotheses for validity while a left-brain view of the world demands certainty. Phrases like, “the science is settled”, “climate change deniers”, and “conspiracy theories” are used to promote the officially sanctioned narrative. Language itself must be made subordinate to this Postmodern left-brain mechanistic view of the world. A mechanistic view outdated 107 years ago when Einstein developed his Theory of Relativity. Out of necessity the Postmodern left ideology demands certainty. They exist in a world which cannot abide contradiction. A world dedicated to the scientism I spoke about in my previous podcast which has replaced actual science. They exist in a world intolerant of the apparent inconsistencies we know to be inherent to the study of Quantum Physics.

 

But before I wade into these waters deeper than a man of my limited expertise in fields of human psychology, quantum physics, and philosophy ought to, allow me to point you toward Dr. Iain McGilchrist. His explanation of why our current cultural zeitgeist has become so soul crushing and toxic has been nothing short of revelatory for me. McGilchrist has written what I consider to be the most significant work of its kind, “The Matter with Things: Our Brains, Our Delusions and the Unmaking of the World” https://www.goodreads.com/book/show/58955313-the-matter-with-things published on 9th November 2021. Dr. McGilchrist stated, "I believe that our vision has been hijacked by a brain system that evolved merely in order to help us manipulate the world, not to understand it...', which is why I am convinced that the phenomenon he describes in “The Matter with Things” has become the defining feature of the Postmodern Academy and of our current political landscape. I invite you to watch this three-part series featuring Dr. McGilchrist with world renown comic writer and actor John Cleese of Monty Python fame at the following links. Enjoy them as I did and let us all reawaken ourselves to a fuller a richer world where there is real diversity of thought and open inquiry so that we may rid ourselves of this dreadful mechanistic view of existence.

Part One: https://youtu.be/S4rdZt_fe5k

Part Two: https://youtu.be/QXxzkU2oeco

Part Three: https://youtu.be/qMTA1qP4yC0

 

 

 

 

 

Mystery and Mythos

 

We live in a fragmented world, a world dedicated to the atomization of understanding, a world governed by scientism rather than science. This is a world dominated by the left brain. It is a view of the world which is lacking in gestalt. Today I would like to discuss with you why scientism has become an ideological parasite. Scientism is the result of looking at things detached from the whole to which they belong. Therefore, today we are seeing many examples of the unintended consequences of our collective actions. The unintended consequences which have resulted from applying simplistic solutions to multivariate complex problems without using our right brain. For it is only in the right brain where gestalt can happen. The right brain allows us to bring together disparate things to form a living entirety.

 

Partly this is the result of modern man's rejection of the mystical. Spirituality and enlightened ascendance can only exist in the realm of the mystical. And our atomised understanding of the world historically is a recent phenomenon. We evolved over countless eons being informed by the mystical. If this did not serve an evolutionary purpose our love of mythos would not exist. Yet modern men reject such narratives. We have come to believe that by parsing the world into inanimate bits and pieces so that we can examine each piece as though it was not part of a larger hole that we can understand how things operate. This is what I refer to as scientism. But evolutionary biology, in specific human evolutionary biology, rejects such a view of the world. The human brain evolved complex mechanisms of intuition that exist only in the right-hemisphere. It is in the right hemisphere the detached and disembodied can become embodied to present a living whole. One of the great problems in developing artificial intelligence is that we do not understand how our intuition operates, why it so often informs us correctly without us understanding the processes of how we arrived at our conclusions. Moreover, if we were to stop and try to explain how we make such judgments we would be unable to breakdown the processes to define them. It would be like asking a brilliant jazz improviser to break down their improvisation into each note. The instant one asks such a question is the very instant when the artist would become soulless and mechanistic.

 

It is in the right brain that our sense of wonder occurs. Piloerection is the phenomenon of wonder that happens when we are struck with awe over something we find deeply moving. Whether we are looking at a beautiful piece of art, or listening to a moving piece of music, we encounter patterns of discovery, and through their beauty we experience a heightened sense of enlightenment. By the same token we instantly know if there is discord and lack of harmony when we encounter the ugly or mechanistic without being able to define why we perceive it to be so. The same may be said for spiritual experiences which evoke a feeling of being in the presence of the Divine, experiences which this materialistic world rejects.

 

This atomised understanding of human existence has devolved life’s mystery into meaningless collisions of matter in an endless cascade of creation and destruction. The result has been our present prevalent nihilism, the belief that there is no absolute truth, just subjective experiences. Which is why Postmodernists believe that we can be anything we choose to be at any given moment, since there is no reality, no way of looking at the world to bring things together into a meaningful entirety. Their faith in scientism fails to grasp that as much as we know that we really know nothing. Real science is never settled. But how do we find meaning in a world rife with scientism?

 

First let me ask a question, if the materialists actually believed there was no truth, then why wouldn't they allow others to find peace, joy, and satisfaction wherever it may be found, particularly in a belief in the Divine? After all, if there is no truth why would it matter what anyone believes? The very fact that the materialists are turning our lives into an atomised dystopia is ipso facto proof that they do have a hierarchy of beliefs. It demonstrates that they do in fact believe in something. Otherwise, they wouldn't insist that we believe as they do. Yes, their own belief system deconstructs itself because they have rejected the mystery and so they live in a contradiction resulting in cognitive dissonance.

 

To the ancient Greeks logos, which describes a left-brain way of looking at the world, was not where ultimate truth was to be found. No, to the ancient Greeks ultimate truth was to be found in mythos. The stories which for countless eons humans have told which help to define in metaphorical terms this infinitely complex world. The stories which are found in mythos are truer then if they were scientifically true. Science tells us nothing about why we see a dynamic, ever changing, and potentially dangerous world the way we do and why we react to it as we do. This is why Jesus spoke to us in parables, so that we could understand mysteries metaphorically. In a certain regard Evangelical Christians share the same delusion that atheists who believe in scientism have, namely that the Scriptures must be literally scientifically true in a historical sense in order for them to be true. But the Bible wasn’t written by scientists and historians. Even the four Gospels do not tell the same story in the identical way but nevertheless the metaphors that they contain are the same and truer than anything else we may hold as Truth. Why?  Because they refer to the same Divine phenomenon. So, this mechanical and atomistic view of the world is now shared by atheists and Christians alike. But in doing so both reject the gestalt of the mysteries revealed in the Scriptures. In the coming together of disparate parts to form a living whole.

 

And so, mankind comes full circle. Out of the Renaissance, onto the Reformation, and on again to the Age of Enlightenment mankind came to view the world scientifically while coming to reject the grand narrative which once defined it. Nietzsche was not rejoicing when he wrote about the death of God and the fact that we had killed him. Furthermore, it was his belief that we had to create our own value structure which has proven to be a murderous impossibility. It is time to revivify the soul of society which has been lost by rejecting the Divine Mystery. God cannot be apprehended ". It takes a revelation of discovery to uncover what has always been there, namely our Divine calling. A mystical journey through revelation of Christ Jesus and Him crucified and resurrected. Moreover, that we also are crucified and resurrected with Him to be seated at the right hand of God the Father above all the troubles of this current age. An age which has given itself to a satanic view of reality. I invite you on this journey but do not expect your left brain to understand the path. Give yourself over to the mystery while taking up your cross to follow Him.