Monday, September 13, 2021

The quality of time is debt penitence

Hard times create strong men. Strong men create good times. Good times create weak men. And weak men create hard times. – G. Micheal Hopf, Those Who Remain

Any judges, even those sitting at the European Court of Justice or wherever else, would have the whole world against them, were they to decide to be honest and expose what is going on. To rule correctly, they would in certain circumstances have many against them who want to be vaccinated, which makes matters harder still. Not to mention people who have already been vaccinated but do not want to learn what’s in the vaccine and discover they made a mistake. And all others involved are legally liable, so don’t want to find out either. With every passing day, as more vaccinations occur and lockdown measures and powers are extended, the number of judges prepared to risk raising their voice decreases. The guilt that these people have heaped upon themselves can no longer be atoned for within their lifetimes.  – Holger Fischer, German lawyer*

We have to mean it.

Any system can be brought into crisis. Resolution comes either in the form of collapse to lower complexity, or transformation to higher complexity. And while history doesn’t repeat, it does rhyme, and surely reaps what it sows. How could it be any other way. When it comes to the potential transformation of human culture via crisis, debt mounts and mounts as inertia resists. Consequently, cultures tend to accumulate unfathomably large debt loads as needed change is resolutely ignored.

The question is why we modern humans refuse so determinedly to accommodate this simple and obvious fact of life, despite having at our fingertips extraordinary amounts of information. I believe it is because we are children, deliberately kept children by other children who believe they are gods.

Because we have lost our way down neon-lit paths of comfort and convenience, deeply habituated ourselves to them by all manner of collective and individual self-deceptions, history’s correction will be sharp. But now matter how great they are, no matter how ignored, we will repay our debts because debts cannot go unpaid – uncorrected – forever. Systems self-correct, or are corrected, in the end. Each of us is responsible for our unique contribution to All That Is.

Free will is sacred. Penitence can be no mere tactic, however desperate the situation; it has to flow untrammelled and earnest from the soul. It can be no fad, no Next Best Thing, no titillating consumer item. We have to mean it. To mean it, we have to accept what we are. “Know thyself” is our calling, our duty. We have reneged on that sacred duty more often than we care to learn and the debt on our failing has come due. It can only be paid in the coin of penitence.

Debt repayment, in the sense I mean here, becomes wisdom through penitence if we mean it. Know thyself; understand your part in the whole that is God. To this end – which is no end but an ever evolving process – the courage to learn what love and intimacy are is essential. Though the detail appears infinite and we are wont to fear the devil in that detail – and then hesitate indefinitely –, the simple truth is that we exist to learn how to love … how to become love. And because Self and Other are simply two notions that unite All That Is into the co-creativity of Being, love is as ‘outward’ as it is ‘inward’. I have come to understand love as an emanating state of being – we might call it true health – that is as unconditional as sunshine.

Consciousness – reality, God, All That Is – is richer and more complex than we could hope to appreciate. Humanity – modernity anyway – stands at its foothills wholly unaware of the size of the mountain it is just beginning to raise its eyes to see, the mountain of which it is an inextricable, co-creative part. Historically, it could not be more exciting. One way or the other, we will move on, health will reassert its authority, correction is happening. The healthiest way through is courage, precisely the courage required to do true penitence. There is no avoiding this rite of passage.

My posts of recent weeks have been an odd mix, but for a reason. They represent one component of my way of self-exposure, of disclosure, of penitence, while also acting as a kind of journal of my perspective on humanity’s most important historical moment. And though carefully written as always, my attention to writerly detail is meant to serve transparency, not to conceal the (so-called) real me.

For me, honesty is as sacred as free will. Employed by a mid-sized multinational corporation for years, I suffered. The office politics, the ambitions, the recalcitrance, the hollowness, ate at me. I quit my job in 2011, followed my heart and ruined my career. This ‘noble’ act caused suffering to my family. The suffering I caused taught me, painfully, that principles are tricksy things. This correction taught me, in turn, that flexibility is vital, but that humility must be part of everything we do. Without humility, moral flexibility can manifest as cynical opportunism. Without humility, we close ourselves off to the new, refuse to learn we are wrong.

But for all I’ve learned and preached, I am still judgemental, still angry at The Powers That Be. My heart and mind know how interconnected everything is, but I judge others anyway. I am a human being after all. When I write about “us”, “we” and “humanity” as children, as infantilised, I genuinely include myself as a fully involved member. We are one interconnected entity of unique perspectives, each as ‘important’ as the other. I know this to be true because I also know we don’t properly understand importance and success. The measures we primarily use – status via money and property accumulation, historical impact, fame – are almost entirely misleading. It is how we learn to love that counts

I have dedicated my life to learning what love is and can report it is a long and winding road! There is far more road ahead than there is behind me.

Earlier this year, washing dishes at the kitchen sink, my rage at the evil I see unfolding all around exploded, and I speared it up at God. The response was immediate: “Have I not guided you to where you need to be?” My rage instantly dissipated on hearing those words in the corner of my mind. 

(It’s worth noting that much of what I have received from God is tinged with the most exquisite, loving, joyful humour, even in reprimand.)

To provide a little background on why I am where I am: I have been shown and have experienced physical miracles that leave me in no doubt at all – and I am by nature doggedly skeptical – that there is only God. As a rule, I do not publicise these details; they prove nothing to anyone but me. The strangest things happen to me, but I am their recipient, not their cause so cannot replicate them. 

For example, I end some of my posts with the line “Let all that is not rooted in truth and love wither and fall away.” It came to me – was given to me – during a particularly powerful, heart-chakra-centred kundalini event. As such, I understand the words as having come from God and feel obliged to share them, in case they prove useful to someone. 

Another example from maybe 10 years ago: My first kundalini event – I didn’t learn about kundalini until 2014 so had no idea what the feelings of ecstatic joy shooting up my spine were – happened in a dream where a tall, elegant man with bright brown eyes said to me, “Never forget: we are becoming one.” It’s up to me to apply my understanding of this and other instructions to my life, using my free will and wisdom, such as they are.

Of course all these experiences affect me deeply. They have germinated in me an irresistible urge to share what I am, what I dare to claim I know. I do not promote what I post on Econosophy anywhere, so reach a very small audience. But seeing as we don’t understand success and importance, I simply share as honestly as I can, and let fate do with my work as it will. It is of the utmost importance to me to protect what I publish here from any possible transformation into – or interpretation as – some kind of consumer item.

Cultural evolution isn’t up to me; it’s up to all of us, jointly, individually: unique entities, as one, rich in diversity. What I post here is but one part of my efforts, though all are aimed at inviting people to honour the sanctity of free will, to notice the corrosive nature of fear, and to explore the liberating yet dutiful nature of unconditional love. I share all of it with that love, and keep my expectations as low as my protesting ego can manage.


* Holger Fischer uses the word “Schuld” in his final sentence of the quote above. In English, it can mean either “debt” or “guilt”. I hope you can see how these words’ meanings blur in the quote’s context, but also generally. This fusion of the two English words within “Schuld” underpins some of the thinking in this article.


Friday, September 3, 2021

Ernst Wolff talk at (fringes of) Davos

[My translation]

US President Franklin Delano Roosevelt once said, “In politics, nothing happens by chance. If it happens, you can bet it was planned that way.” When we look back over what has transpired in the last year and a half, this quote becomes particularly alarming. Can it really be true that everything we’ve seen really was planned? 

I want to state this clearly right at the start: I cannot produce any definitive proof of a plan, for example in the form of verified documents. But after having intensively followed the events of the last 18 months, I am compelled to say that there is an overwhelming number of signs and clues pointing in precisely this direction. Today, I would like to talk about them and their ramifications.

The situation we currently find ourselves in is unique in history. Never before has such a large percentage of humanity been subjected to such a coercive global regime as now. And never before have so many measures been enacted that appear – at first glance – so confusing, at times so nonsensical, and just as often contradictory. 

Officially, we are confronted with the most serious health crisis there ever was. But the measures enacted in response have not improved the situation. Rather, they have continually made it worse. Every doctor could confirm today that the health of the majority of humanity is worse than before the crisis. And even from the perspective of those who enacted the measures, the results are shambolic. The allegedly threatening “fourth wave” and pronouncements demanding third, fourth and fifth injections reveal that all previous measures have failed utterly in their objective. 

And this is far from the whole story.

We are also confronted, as a direct consequence of the lockdowns, with a severe global economic crisis. Production is slowing in every corner of the world, the logistics industry is on its knees, supply chains are broken, harvests are failing, and we face food and – critically important to a number of industries – semiconductor shortages. 

But here too we see these problems not being addressed and solved. Instead, we see their exacerbation and proliferation via further measures and the threat of yet more restrictions. A recent example: In China, the world’s third largest port was closed because of a single port worker who tested positive. Or in New Zealand: Last week, five million people we placed under lockdown because one single 58 year old tested positive.

Another crisis impacts the middle classes, who are by a large margin responsible for most employment world wide, as well as the source of most government tax revenue. The middle classes, thanks to ceaselessly fomented uncertainty and the continuous introduction of new regulations, are having their backs pressed ever harder against the wall, week by week. This is the deepest crisis they have ever faced.

But all this is still far from the whole story.

We are also in the midst of a rapid increase in global inflation, particularly in raw materials, production prices, and food. And here too we see no corrective responses; the opposite is true. The money faucet is kept open, indeed, the flow is accelerating. States and central banks have poured almost $20 trillion into global money circuits, and there appears to be no end in sight. The IMF – the most powerful financial organisation in the world – is printing $650 billion dollars this coming Monday in SDRs (special drawing rights), the most it has ever generated.

The social situation is no better. Just one example: In the US – the world’s largest economy – four million people are threatened with forced eviction because they cannot pay their rent or mortgage. More than ten times that number – remember, we’re talking about the wealthiest economy in the world – cannot feed themselves from their income. And that which the deliberate destruction of the economy and accelerating inflation have not achieved has been left to our politicians: dividing the people at an unprecedented scale.

And now, perhaps as the cherry on the top of this heaped cake, we witness the USA deliberately abscond from Afghanistan. The Taliban have been allowed to inherit military equipment worth $20 billion: one complete air force and 11 air-force support stations, which will with absolute certainty trigger the next massive refugee crisis.

Why? That’s the question on everyone’s lips. Why have measures been taken across the planet that bring in their wake one disaster after the other, sinking humanity ever deeper into crisis, rather than lifting it from its suffering?

To answer this question, we have to ask two additional questions: Whose vested interests are served by this global agenda? Who profits from it?

The answer to both questions is clear. The largest beneficiary of the current crisis and the most important power player behind the scenes is the digital-financial complex: a sort of interest group headed by the largest IT companies and financial concerns of our time. Among those largest IT companies are Apple, Alphabet (Google’s holding company), Amazon, Microsoft and Facebook. The market value of these five companies alone currently stands at an unimaginable $9.1 trillion. By way of comparison, the combined GDP of France, Germany and Italy totals $8.6 trillion. In addition to these large financial companies, we have the financial giants: BlackRock, Vanguard, State Street and Fidelity. They are all significantly involved in all major IT players, and not only that. These four alone currently manage funds totalling $22.6 trillion. By way of comparison, the combined 2020 GDP of the EU’s 28 member countries was $15.7 trillion.

But it isn’t just the monstrous financial might of the digital-financial complex that gives it so much power. Let’s first take a look at the IT companies. They don’t only have great market power themselves, they also control hundreds of thousands of other companies by controlling how they digitise. This means they have continual access to those companies’ data flows. The IT industry is nothing other than a tumour that, over the course of recent years, has metastasised in all branches of the economy and made them dependent upon it. It now controls them completely.

The financial powers look no different. They control stakes in all large companies worldwide and can move any market anywhere in any direction they choose. The largest of their number, BlackRock, possesses a data-analysis system (“Aladdin”), now more than 40 years old, which represents the largest source of financial data the world has ever seen. With this data, BlockRock advises the world’s largest central banks from behind the scenes: the Federal Reserve and the ECB. It should be clear from the enormous advantage “Aladdin” gives BlackRock, who depends on whom. 

We are thus looking at an historically unique mixture of accumulated financial power connected to discretionary power over an unimaginably comprehensive data pool. From the beginning of the crisis, this combination has helped these companies to grow as never before. And not only that, the rate of growth continues to accelerate. In the last quarter alone – April, May and June 2021 – these companies have recorded the largest profits in their histories. 

In view of these facts, we don’t need much imagination to conclude that the digital-financial complex is the centre of power around which everything else revolves. The digital-financial complex stands far above all governments and can, at any time it chooses, force any cabinet on earth to its knees, and make it compliant. 

But we must now examine the methods used by the digital-financial complex since the crisis began, for it looks at first glance as if it is destroying the very ground beneath it, and from which it profits. A couple of examples: Should the digital-financial complex destroy the middle class, it would destroy its own life source; the middles classes pay the most taxes and create the most jobs. And if, additionally, it drives inflation ever higher, it would then be damaging itself too. And if it causes increasing social unrest through extremes of inequality, it poisons the soil that sustains its business. 

These are reasonable objections. But they fail to account for reality as it is.

Reality looks much more like this: The digital-financial complex has no other option than to do precisely what it is currently doing. What we are witness to is not some agenda typed out at someone’s desk that details how to accumulate yet more money and power, and then, finally, to lean back and enjoy its pleasures in peace. What we are witnessing is a terrible act of desperation, likely the largest in human history. Its roots lie in the harsh fact that the system on which the digital-financial complex depends can no longer be sustained with methods that were successful the past. In fact, this complex had been face to face with its own demise as long ago as the 2007-8 financial crisis. Had governments at that time not mobilised enormous sums of money, had they not instructed central banks to create even greater amounts out of thin air, the system would have collapsed. And yet the rescue was short lived. The amount of money needed grew and grew over the course of the next 12 years, interest rates had to be lowered again and again. In other words, the system had to be made more and more unstable. This vector cannot be sustained indefinitely.

Last year, its time was up.

In March 2020, the next collapse was imminent. It was postponed again, though for the last possible time, by a power move involving lowering rates to zero and injecting trillions – not billions – of dollars. However, the act brought into being a wholly new situation, qualitatively speaking. Kicking the can down the road again would require driving interest rates into negative territory; a move that would destroy the current banking system. Banks cannot survive over the long term on negative interest rates. In other words, another kick of the can using the same strategy will not happen. One might, at most, inject trillions upon trillions of dollars more, but with the result that inflation – already alarmingly overheated – would accelerate into hyperinflation.

The situation in which the digital-financial system finds itself, then, is a choice between financial collapse, or hyperinflation. In other words, the total devaluation of money. That means we find ourselves in an historical moment where the digital-financial complex, [trapped] in the framework of the current system, can only choose between two different modes of collapse. 

What to do?

Obviously, the digital-financial complex opted for a new system and installation thereof as a two-pronged strategy. On the one hand, the complex is constructing a new system behind the scenes, out of public sight. On the other and simultaneously, it is using the system’s demise to plunder what remains by any and all means possible. This is exactly what we have been witnessing since March 2020; the deliberate and knowingly initiated destruction of the world economy with the sole objective of self enrichment, while installing a new system with central-bank assistance and in cooperation with the IT giants.

We already know what this new system is going to look like. It involves the complete removal of cash and banks in their current form, and the introduction of digital central-bank money. The final goal appears to be that each one of us will have but one single account over which all transactions will be registered. And this account will no longer be hosted at a commercial bank, but at the central bank.

The background of this plan is as follows. Digital central-bank money is programmable. Because central banks can create unlimited amounts of money out of nothing, one could in fact introduce negative interest rates without destroying the system. But this is not the only property of digital central-bank money. It would enable the state to monitor all transactions, to assign each of us different tax rates, as well as charge us with customised penalties. The state could, in certain circumstances, hand out money with different expiry dates and force us to spend certain amounts of it within certain timeframes. It could also hand out money for specific purposes, command us to spend particular amounts for specific ends in specific regions. But above all, the state would be able to disconnect every one of us from all payment streams with simple mouse click. In other words, financially deactivate us.

Digital central-bank money would be the most effective tool of social control ever to have existed in human history, and thus no more or less than the installation of an all-encompassing dictatorship brought into being by means of a new money system. 

But the whole enterprise has an enormous problem: the foreseeable resistance of the people. We can be certain that a large percentage of humanity will simply not accept such disempowerment; introduction of digital central-bank money would lead to massive disruption and unrest. And it is exactly this factor that led the digital-financial complex to not choose the gradual, incremental introduction of digital central-bank money. They opted for the exact opposite: to cause unrest themselves by throwing societies into chaos, and then presenting digital central-bank money as the great solution, the means by which we can afford a universal basic income.

If you think this is some wild conspiracy theory conjured out of thin air, please recall precisely what we have experienced over the last 18 months. Under the pretext of going to war against a sickness, terrible, irreparable damage to health and economy has been wrought whose full consequences we have only just begun to feel. Meanwhile, the digital-financial complex works 24/7 to exacerbate the damage done. In parallel, social divisions are systematically deepened by driving new wedges between societies over and over again. All this leads us, purposefully, in one single direction: social unrest, followed by civil war … across the planet.

And all of it, according to all the information I have analysed, is so desired.

We are currently subjected to measures of every conceivable form, each designed to cause the greatest possible social chaos, so that, at the pinnacle of this chaos, we are to be presented with the panacea called universal basic income, which will transform maximal chaos into maximal control.

There is, it should also be pointed out, a second reason – as understood by the powerful – why a universal basic income must be installed. We find ourselves in the middle of the Fourth Industrial Revolution. The coming years will bring the destruction of millions upon millions of jobs, all replaced by artificial intelligence; millions of consumers will no longer be able to consume as before. Demand for consumer products will collapse at an accelerating rate. And because the system is driven by consumption, the powerful must, to keep it going, arrest this downward spiral. This can only be accomplished by handing out money to the jobless. 

We can see that what we have experienced over the past 18 months, and continue to experience, is following a plan. This plan is essentially the deconstruction of the current system to the benefit of the elites, the creation of maximal economic and social chaos and the installation of a new system under the pretext of wanting to provide humanitarian aid.

By the way, you can read about this plan in two books – The Fourth Industrial Revolution and The Great Reset – by Klaus Schwab, whose World Economic Forum plays a pivotal role in this agenda. In the last 50 years, the WEF has succeeded in becoming the most important control centre of the digital-financial complex, initially by connecting business leaders, later politicians, and later still media creators and royal families, and also, in the 90s, defining their direction and focus.

We know today that, since 1992, the Global Leaders of Tomorrow, and since 2005 the Young Global Leaders, have been given a systematic and increasingly detailed education, and that it is precisely people from their number who operate the levers of power through this period. Whether that be Bill Gates, Jeff Bezos, or Jack Marr from IT; whether BlackRock boss Larry Fink, IMF boss Kristalina Georgieva, or ex-Bank of England governor Mark Carney from the financial world; or whether Emanuel Macron, Sebastian Kurz, or Angela Merkel from politics, they were all either educated by the WEF, or sit on its steering committees. And it’s not only the 1,300 members of this group of tightly interconnected elites operating levers the world over; since 2012, over 10,000 under 30s – so-called Global Shapers – have been added, brought together by the WEF, and who now exercise their influence on world affairs in keeping with WEF objectives.

If you want to know what this plan looks like, I recommend taking a close look at Klaus Schwab’s works. And for those who still do not believe that everything we have experienced and continue to experience is following a plan, they should note the publication date of Schwab’s The Great Reset: the book appeared on 19 July 2020, and thus not quite four months after the start of the global lockdown. It contains precise instructions on how covid19 should be used to “creatively destroy” – Schwab’s words – and a build a new world. It should be noted that the human image he describes is reminiscent of the darkest aspects of national socialism.

I know all this sounds shocking, like a carefully prepared apocalypse. And indeed, the agenda being pursued here is obviously not only planned, but also almost unequalled in malice and insidiousness. Who could ever have guessed that the world would be brought to the edge of collapse under the pretext of protecting people from a disease? That people’s freedom of travel, freedom of assembly, freedom of speech, and freedom of opinion would be withdrawn, that 100,000,000 people would be condemned to starvation, and all of it in the name of their alleged protection.

Who could have guessed that a blatant eugenicist by the name of Klaus Schwab would amass sufficient power not only to propagate his horrific vision for the fusion of humanity with artificial intelligence across the planet, but also to drive it forward with the help of tens of thousands? All of this is a profoundly disturbing development we currently live with, under which we all must suffer, and which must surely freeze the blood of every normal thinking and feeling person on earth.

But I come now to the most important message I have today. This historical moment has another dimension, a wholly different aspect, one that should, above all, give us great drive and energy for the demands the future will place on us. The elite plan and Klaus Schwab’s vision are doomed to fail … for several reasons.

The most important of these is that the narrative of the deadly virus that is an existential threat to humanity cannot be sustained indefinitely. We are already seeing how this house of lies is imploding all around us, and how, to keep it upright, ever more absurd arguments and ever more violent defamations are necessary. It is important to note on this point that the severity with which the media go about their daily business is testimony to its weakness, not its strength. Those who must resort to applying ever more pressure, to disseminating ever more grotesque lies – such as the pandemic of the unvaccinated –, who declare healthy people society’s number one danger, or who shut down whole countries due to a single positive test result, do so for the simple reason that they have no arguments left, and in their desperation throw punches blindly in every direction.

It is claimed Abraham Lincoln once said, “You can fool all the people some of the time, and some of the people all of the time, but you cannot fool all the people all of the time.” Those words are being proven true today. This has immense significance for us; ironically, it opens what Klaus Schwab calls the window of opportunity, albeit with exactly the opposite dynamic. As a result of their collapsing narrative, the credibility of those who led us into this situation is being buried more deeply day by day. This opens, for all of us, a unique window to initiate a thoroughgoing and comprehensive campaign to expose all lies propagated thus far.

The objective conditions for explaining to people the true background of the alleged pandemic, the world’s real power networks, and the actual dangers we face, were never as positive as now. And these conditions improve by the day; our opponents are forced to tie themselves up in increasingly ineffective lies. And even if the digital-financial complex succeeds in introducing their planned money system, that would not be the end of the world. Their plan requires a comprehensive system of enforcement. Its advocates will have to establish ever stricter price controls, raise the universal basic income again and again, and will be repeatedly forced into increasing inflation, which must in consequence lead to the growing impoverishment of the world’s people. And all this will bring the people into endless conflict with the state and its controllers.

We must be honest with ourselves. We face without doubt very turbulent and dangerous times, but we do hold an historical trump card. Its power lies in the fact that our opponents cannot act on reason; they are mad with greed and lust for power. They are thus compelled to lead themselves into ever more intractable difficulties. This is exactly what we should exploit, and never forget. Our opponents may well possess far more money and property, and on top of that all the world’s weaponry, but their power is based neither on their money, nor on their property, nor on their weaponry. Their power rests entirely on one single factor: ignorance. In other words, it exists only while the majority fails to see through the games the minority plays with them.

As shocking as everything the digital-financial complex and its followers have done in the past 18 months – and continue to do – is, they have manoeuvred themselves into a situation from which they can no longer escape, and because of which they are forced to cross more and more red lines. What that means for all of us is this: All we need to do in this exceptional moment is stay calm, expose their lies, and explain to others little by little why and by whom they’ve had the wool pulled over their eyes. If we succeed in that, and in doing so calmly remember the strength of our arguments, we will not only solve the world’s current problems, we will also accomplish much more than that. We will use humanity’s deepest crisis to take control of history’s reins and guide it towards a truly different future.

Wednesday, September 1, 2021

“Follow the Science”

The mathematical elaboration of a physical theory can be tied to observable facts only through translation. In order to introduce experimental conditions into a calculation, one must make a version that replaces the language or concrete observation [with] the language of numbers; in order to [turn] the results which the theory predicts into something observable, one needs a theme to transform a numerical value into an indication formulated in the language of experiment. (Duhem in Cassin, Dictionary of Untranslatables: p1,151.)

The history of instruments shows that a general approach to improve the reliability of an instrument is to narrow its application scope, that is, to make it special for a limited range of subjects ... The proliferation of instruments provides a material base for the specialization of science. (Chen, Thomas Kuhn’s latest notion of incommensurability: p271)

The very idea is an abuse, a perversion of reality designed to contort hearts and minds away from a truth so obvious, only the most convoluted casuistry could possibly conceal it. It is as if much of humanity has been bewitched by an illusionist’s cold and practiced sleight of hand.

Science generates data as guided by theories it always strives to disprove

The closest science comes to settled facts are those findings it has yet to disprove. Hence, science is necessarily guided by theory, not fact; there are no facts in an absolute sense. Theories are conceived on the basis of other theories that together constitute a framework, without which science simply cannot be. For example, science in the abstract is by definition the theory of falsificationism. Is falsificationism falsifiable? Or: Is science itself an unfalsifiable theory? 

Theories are the soil of meaning that nourishes the body of science, without which science is impossible, unthinkable. And it cannot be truly neutral – neutrality is itself a value – though it is right science makes the attempt to be neutral, albeit in humility, and in particular by maintaining a dispassionate distance from the claims made in its name.

And perhaps above all this, the languages of science’s many disciplines must be continually renewed to effectively translate the data generated within the context of the theories that birth the initiating impulse to seek out that very data, but to an audience that must then interpret those translations from its almost endlessly varied perspectives. 

Where in this maelstrom of interpretation are the immutable facts we should obey? And when you believe you’ve found one, what do you think it means? What a fact means to us determines how we act on it, how we form policy around it, how we let it influence our lives. If it means nothing to us, it is nothing to us. 

Thus, it is meaning that matters in the end, not fact. Claims to the contrary are necessarily appeals to meaning.

The core corruption responsible for the controversial mantra that is the title of this article is materialism. Science – here I mean Science, or Scientism rather than science per se – has been made its slave, though certainly not in the sense of humble service. It should be clear by now that materialism cannot account for reality’s observable starting point: consciousness. Consciousness is life itself, nature, God, All That Is. There is only consciousness. 

Whence so brazen a claim? 

Well, if we assert both consciousness and matter, we choose the impossibility of dualism. That, or we confront the impossibility of materialism; there is only matter. And, because no one can find matter anywhere, we are left with consciousness, proven real by the inescapable observation that we experience our realities. 

The deeper we look into what our senses tell us is the fabric of reality, the more we find ‘mere’ information, rather than discreet matter. Information (a.k.a. meaning) is to consciousness as matter is to materialism. How can there be meaning without consciousness? Ergo, information requires consciousness to be possible. By way of supporting example, the foundation of modern science – physics – is at a loss as to what objects (“things”) are. If there are no objects, what is objectivity? (Isn’t objectivity the stuff of science?)

Spacetime is doomed. There is no such thing as spacetime fundamentally in the actual underlying description of the laws of physics. That’s very startling, because what physics is supposed to be about is describing things as they happen in space and time. So if there’s no spacetime, it’s not clear what physics is about.
 (Nima Arkhani-Hamed)

You understand my words. You follow my meaning. And yet materialism cannot accommodate this most self-evident and fundamental of truths. Its logic compels it to assert that understanding – which is an experience – is illusory. Somehow (materialism is compelled to argue) the complex biochemical interactions, the bioelectrical activity of the neural networks that are your brain in action … somehow such activities deceive ‘you’ into believing, mistakenly, that ‘you’ are conscious. This dead (a.k.a. mechanical) activity supposedly generates the illusion of understanding, of meaning, the illusion of experience itself.

How can experience be an illusion? 

Seriously: How on earth can experience be an illusion? It’s about as far-fetched a claim as it is possible to make.

Ask yourself this: What is the illusory experiencer of the illusion of conscious awareness made of? What dead matter could be so convincingly deceived? Your biochemistry? Microtubules? Neural networks? How can something essentially dead – bioelectrical activity – be fooled into experiencing itself as alive? 

How in the name of logic can matter be deceived into the experience of selfhood?

To recap, the choice we face is: idealism (consciousness is all there is), dualism (the impossible interaction of matter and mind), and materialism (there is only matter). Seeing as we do not find matter when we look deeply for it, and seeing as we undeniably experience our realities, it is eminently reasonable to assert idealism, that there is only consciousness. The details of what that implies are beyond the scope of this article, as of my humble faculties.

Hence, the real deception at play here is, in fact, materialism’s implied claim that life is death. Many of us have fallen for it. I suspect, at root, out of fear.

Fearfully craving certainty, we create human approximations of reality as proxies for All That Is those approximations can only sketch. Then, still fearfully craving certainty, we wilfully confuse our clumsy sketches for The Truth.

Because humans are riddled with repressed and unexamined fears, and fragile with pride because of said repression and self-ignorance, science can and has been bought. This pride-trap is currently constructed from materialism (of course it can be made of other paradigms; fear and pride are almost endlessly manipulatable). Consequently, humanity is suffering most horribly under the auspices of Corporate Science (Scientism’s manifestation in thought and deed), which proliferates in an acidic atmosphere of fragile egos battling for ‘success’ and faux immortality. This situation is, by ways fair and foul, the offspring of materialism. By now, Science (not science) is a whoring hiss of white noise rushing nowhere in pursuit of ‘profit’. Science, purblind with human pride, refuses to see the nose on its face. It has become a coven of posturing priests who deride anyone who deviates even slightly from Scientism’s asserted consensus, termed Settled Science.

Because materialism is Scientism’s foundational dogma, there is a huge blindspot regarding how consciousness guides reality, up to and including the psychological failings of scientists, professors, politicians, think tanks, media proprietors, and other institutional manifestations of authority. This blindspot aids and abets the process by which we are forced to uncritically “Follow the Science”.

This is what governments claim to follow. They mean, in truth, that they “follow” the Science they are instructed to appoint, which then pronounces those ‘truths’ prepaid by Science’s various corporate paymasters. This behemoth is what We, the Uninitiated, the Unordained, are commanded to trust. Blindly. Well, we must! Lacking sufficient training, we simply cannot understand what the experts – of ever narrowing fields of expertise – are saying. 

All that remains for us is to obey … in unison … as one mechanical totality … what they command.

Isn’t it institutional authority we are commanded to follow? 

Do we understand, intimately, what authority really is? Do you know what authority is? Could any science answer such a question for us? Would we be allowed to question its answer?

Though denied by materialism, free will is sacred and a property of consciousness. Meekly permitting its metastasising abuse, we submit inexorably to the tightening illusion of death.

It is simply no longer possible to believe much of the clinical research that is published, or to rely on the judgment of trusted physicians or authoritative medical guidelines. I take no pleasure in this conclusion, which I reached slowly and reluctantly over my two decades as an editor of The New England Journal of Medicine.  (Dr. Marcia Angell, NY Review of Books, January 15, 2009, Drug Companies & Doctors: A Story of Corruption)

The case against science is straightforward: much of the scientific literature, perhaps half, may simply be untrue. Afflicted by studies with small sample sizes, tiny effects, invalid exploratory analyses, and flagrant conflicts of interest, together with an obsession for pursuing fashionable trends of dubious importance, science has taken a turn towards darkness…
  […] Journal editors deserve their fair share of criticism too. We aid and abet the worst behaviours. Our acquiescence to the impact factor fuels an unhealthy competition to win a place in a select few journals. Our love of ‘significance’ pollutes the literature with many a statistical fairy-tale…Journals are not the only miscreants. Universities are in a perpetual struggle for money and talent… (Dr. Richard Horton, editor-in-chief, The Lancet, in The Lancet, 11 April, 2015, Vol 385, Offline: What is medicine’s 5 sigma?)

Saturday, August 28, 2021

Welcome to the collective

We want what is best for you. We also know what is best for you; we are made of you, all of you. What are we if not you? What are you if not us? How could we ever disagree.

Image from movie Metropolis

No, we are no machine. But efficiency saves effort. Saved effort saves lives. The collective speaks with the wisdom of those who are the best of us. Why waste time reinventing the wheel when you can stand on the shoulders of the collective and see further than you could alone on your own two legs. It makes no logical sense to deny what is true; such is a waste of effort. Waste harms the collective, and what is the collective if not you? As you do unto other, so you do unto self. We two are one. 

We are all one.

That fire you feel for what you might call “freedom” is just the heat of an immature ego wilfully refusing to mature into good sense. We understand it. We do not judge. But we must be strong and firm. We are the collective and work for what is best for you, for all of you. We are you. Know that burn of desire to do things your way as selfishness refusing to be put in its rightful place. The Law of the Way Things Are just is. Nothing could be more obvious. We’ve been around long enough by now, the best of us have figured it all out, written it down for all to see. How can you disagree with what is? How can that serve you?

Constraint liberates. Accept the constraints of how things must be and shine for us within our walls, within our great limits, in peace. 

Our streets are lined with gold. Wealth rains down on our cities. Our riverbeds sparkle with impossible jewels made more radiant by the river’s pellucid waters washing them clean, every minute of every day. The syntheses that grow the foods that nourish your body are perfect. Babies born painlessly from the wombs we wove from the knowledge we have, grow untroubled into what they need to be: flawless citizens set neatly in their right place. Everything is the best it can be. Everything.

We are an embrace mapped to your safety and comfort, a hammock whose fabric knows exactly what shape you need. The strong boughs to which it is secured are resolute principles immutable in their rightness. At peace in what we are, there is nothing you need worry about ever again.

This is far beyond science. We are the certainty of what is.

Welcome to the collective.

Saturday, August 21, 2021

Schoolroom Earth

A teacher sees she is slowly losing control of her class. A small percentage are troublemakers who do little more than disrupt. All appeals to reason have fallen on deaf ears. She enforces stricter rules.

She half expected the move to fail. Prior to cracking down on the class as a whole, even her solid relationship with the good students – who often helped controlling the know-it-alls, the troublemakers – had been showing signs of strain. Perhaps they were losing faith in her. And despite herself, she could not help but notice a certain dangerous charisma about the wilful group, a robust yet unearned self-confidence. So their reaction to the crackdown saddens, but does not surprise her.

Loud, unruly, yet eloquent, the small group make rabble-rousing speeches to the undecided, encouraging them to rise up and overthrow the teacher. She has become, they argue, “draconian”, a “drag on their freedom of expression”. “We don’t need her!”, they bellow in conclusion, pointing at her in open defiance. She watches the small minority flip to a majority with a loud cheer. 

Her loyal students are suddenly off balance, their equilibrium thrown into an indecisive mix of anger and fear. In a burst of uncharacteristically disciplined action, the loyalists are cordoned off as a large group ejects her from the building, and locks her out. 

She finds herself surrounded by the rest of her colleagues, each as dazed as she.

*

So, what happens next?

Out with the old boss, in with the new? Who rules now and in the name of what vision?

Before answering, note that allegorical micro-stories like the above tend to encode assumptions it is always wise to tease out and contemplate. 

How profoundly do context and structure influence behaviour, imagination and worldview? Are separate classrooms a natural law, which must therefore be set in stone as an educational foundation for all time? Should teachers run separated classrooms as if their authority is final? Should any human have final authority? If so, under what conditions? Can a curriculum be perfect, beyond criticism? Should anyone or anything – aside from nature itself – carefully guard the keys to knowledge and wisdom?

What is loyalty? How should it best be effected and expressed? Blindly? Or wisely? Which behaviours constitute “wise loyalty”?

Zooming out: Does socioeconomic specialisation – a property of modern complex society – require hierarchical structures and institutionalised authority? Does constant change work its magic on everything, or do some things remain resolutely constant? Nuclear families? The dichotomy between civilised and wild? Between anarchy and hierarchy? Are these axes axiomatic, or simply cultural artefacts?

More broadly still: Wouldn’t a more nuanced, organic and patient human world be healthier than the frenzied rigidity of modernity? Isn’t consumerism simply the socioeconomics of narcissism, of decadence? Won’t perpetual economic growth and consumerism inevitably collapse around their systemic flaws? If yes, what should follow, and how might we prepare for a next system? Contemplating this, what might authority look like in a post-consumerism world?

Should we attempt to halt technological advance and/or perpetuate consumerism just to keep as many humans as possible economically ‘valuable’? Can value be measured? Must its definition belong solely to economics? Shouldn’t we culturally reassess how we value each other? Or should we leave such decisions to current authorities, yield ever more of our thinking and decision making to The Experts (of the old system), accepting (for the sake of argument) that increasing specialisation is an immutable corollary of civilisational advance?

Is such questioning more harmful than beneficial? If yes, what would that imply for humanity in terms of health, creativity, joy, spirit?

*

Just as it is impossible to be ready for parenthood, it is impossible to be ready for a healthier way of governing ourselves when history comes knocking; a steep and turbulent learning curve always follows the advent of both. But can we learn to want to do what it takes to build something more organic, less mechanical? Or will we choose the ‘security’ of tyranny, even though history shows tyrants devour their children, their adherents, their acolytes?

We stand at an historical juncture, perhaps the most profound humanity has faced. For me, the most problematic aspect of this moment is how few of us are willing to look it, and ourselves, squarely in the eye, and take responsibility for our contribution to the modern situation humanity has earned. If truly we lack that vital courage, we will by default ‘choose’ the ‘security’ of tyranny, of lifelessness; a mechanically rigid world order conceived by the very few, for the very few. Discovering that this is so requires a mix of historical knowledge, dispassionate distance from groupthink, and compassion for the human condition.

The good news is that we needn’t overthrow any teachers in a revolutionary sense. It’s more that we are tasked with learning how to talk to each other across the many gulfs that seem to divide us. Real progress will proceed from sincerely open conversation. That’s precisely what Schoolroom Earth has been slowly bringing to our attention these last millennia. (And no, I do not have answers to the above questions, only the strong sense they are the right ones.)

From my point of view, the core challenge is creatively and peacefully globalising through directly democratic local/regional polities that see the skill of intimate interpersonal and broader intercultural communication as paramount. We will need to figure out how the power to decide global issues can be shared across many thousands of regional polities. An incorruptible science must surely be the cornerstone of such an attempt. To establish that, humanity must first evolve a very different value system, one that is not beholden to the crudity of the price-money-market triad.

But alongside that incorruptible science, we will need to be clear that science only informs. We cannot “follow the science”, an odd phrase that implies powerlessness, blindness, passivity. Decisions come from wisdom – from the heart – no matter how evolved. Data, no matter how scrupulously gathered, is never sufficient on its own. It always exists in context, and can never capture everything that needs to be considered. As such, mistakes that sometimes lead to tragedy will be made, forever; to err is human. But healthy communities weather bad times best; atomised individuals rarely cope as well… We are a social animal. Currently, the system is forcing ever finer atomisation via a mendacious “we’re all in it together” mantra that will produce as dysfunctional and sickly a society – globally – as it is possible to imagine, however short lived. 

The clearest evidence this is so is the vitriol now aimed at those who question ‘authority’. Whom do such divisive tactics serve? The expendable obedient? Or the tiny minority pushing the process forward using the obedient as canon fodder?

Sunday, August 15, 2021

Words fail us

(Intimacy is a virus.)

It is a cliche that words are not enough. When the task is to communicate across a bitter divide in the midst of the fiercest and most unrelenting propaganda campaign in human history, as globalist tyrants bet their mightily deranged farm against the rest of humanity in dogged pursuit of a pristine, ordered global system that does away, once and for all, with all that is ugly, uncouth and untamed in homo sapiens, words can only fail us. Words have become our enemy as  surely as we are our own worst enemies. This moment is truly civilisation’s bitter harvest.

I am being provocative because words fail us.

I am trying not to shout because words fail us.

Always: I fumble my righteous anger, misguide my noble efforts to let right be done; words are not enough. The way out of this predictable collective breakdown begins within, in silence. (Another cliche.)

Michael Jackson sang, “If you wanna make the world a better place, take a look at yourself and make that change!” It, too, is a cliche because words have been abused almost beyond repair.

Where is honesty? What is honesty? A commodity? Something talented actors and politicians sell? Will you be buying the Left or Right today? Which half of reality would you like to condemn?

What hasn’t been said. Yes, there are endless ways of saying the same thing, but it has all been said. 

We are children sat sulking in a boundless playroom, surrounded by an infinity of toys, malcontents forevermore, inconsolable in our cornucopias of individualised fun.

I am being provocative because words fail us. Words betray us. It is their retribution, payback for the abuse.

For a while, a few years ago, I admired academic rigour. Now, mostly, I see it as self-preening noise splintering itself out into vacuity, oddly out of options in its endlessly divisible rubric. 

Is there anything that can’t be proved? 

Casuistry is a deadly skill. Who trusts lawyers? Who trusts politicians? Sorry, The Science. Who trusts salesmen? Sorry, saleswomen. Er, salesfolk? And yet the entities pushing drugs for profit are orchestrating us to believe that infection and contagion are now morally reprehensible. How dare you risk someone somewhere dying! You unhuman! You animal! 

Each one of us is either an actual or potential domestic terrorist because we are alive. Better put your unthinking obedience brightly on display! Only then will you be safe.

The insanity is so absolute it is beyond comprehension. It is a dumb scream collapsed to white noise.

But the tyrant lives symbiotically within and without. The outer signals to the inner and we respond, darkly beguiled by what we refuse to know we have become. We are tended neuroses grown obsessional with our unique preferences. Double-de-caff latte with thrice-blended goat’s milk boiled then cooled to 72 degrees celsius and served in a pig-pink recycled-recyclable cup, NOW!

A narcissistic system spawns narcissism, and narcissists are insatiable. Emptiness is the fuel. And of course this too is a platitude; it’s all been said before.

Become too afraid to know our divinity, we choose to deny there is only god. Too afraid of opprobrium, of jeers, of being a conspiracy theorist, of being the fool, the odd one out exposed in our secret atom-loneliness, we choose ordered mechanics.

Spiritually bankrupt, desperate for safety, we are skilfully nudged through swirls of words away from all memory of love.

How much longer can we bear life this way? How far too late?


Sunday, August 8, 2021

Broken open

Systems prepare for their overthrow with a preliminary period of petrification. 

R. H. Tawney

In the empires of usury, the sentimentality of the man with the soft heart calls to us because it speaks of what has been lost. 

Lewis Hyde

For whatever reason, I’ve always been allergic to group-think. One consequence of this – or perhaps cause – is being an outsider observing others, in judgment more often than I’d like, but less and less as I grow older and hopefully wiser. And if I have indeed grown in wisdom over the last decade or so, it is primarily because I was broken open.

This article will not pick over the details of how that break happened. It looks at the different consequences that flow from open and closed hearts, and the states of being that give rise to those emotional postures. A poem I wrote at possibly the nadir – or zenith – of that period some seven years ago begins the exploration. I think it captures the richness and pain stemming from that particular vulnerability we need to sustain somehow if we are to communicate effectively with each other during this civilisational turning point.


Rid me of me

Hello new day.

Hello today’s me.

Hello scattered birdsong and sunlight on the floor.

Welcome to my shifting landscape. Please

penetrate my self-indulgence, cut through

the rictus of my looping thoughts.

Raise me up to cast me down across my iron throne.
Please 
    break my back.

Please snap my resistance

    to your splendid offerings.

From a naked beginning,

let me go innocent and unready

into the kaleidoscope of your moments.

Help me let the pain,

    the unsummoned aftershocks,

    the horrid fantasies 
flowing from my fool’s error

flow through and on
through and on 

like wind through my hair,

like trains rattling through a station.

Can Love and pain be one?

Can I be that open?

I talk it alive around 

yet not inside me.

If this has power to change,

then I say: I invite you in.

Nothing is where I’d like to be: 

denuded, faithful, God-serving.

Pregnant with unexpected generosity. 

Deep in pain. Deep in Love. Anonymous.

But I want. I desire

beauty in my hands        beauty a blackbird honest and immediate

a song for my eyes

for my embrace    trapped to me alone
understood   contained   made mine.

Must I know

I will never be worthy?

Is this what I first must learn?


I’ve shared this poem more for what it evokes at the individual level than for any pride or shame I might have about its quality. People tend not to risk profound change, or let go into themselves, unless backed into a corner. When it comes to entire cultures, this is far more than doubly so. We evolve slowly at best. When an evolutionary leap is required – because we’ve been kicking that can down the road –, we don’t submit without a fight. We cling as fast as we can to what we know, to comfort, to familiarity.

Totalitarianism is in some sense a mass-psychotic product of the fear of needed radical change in a modern civilisational context. It has a decent chance to install itself only when certain generalised conditions are met: free-floating anxieties, free-floating discontent, social isolation, meaningless lives, and a controllable mass media. 

(“Free-floating” refers to conditions that cannot be explained: we are afraid and discontented but cannot fathom what the causes might be. As such, they seem stubbornly insoluble.)

With a mass media at their disposal, those who would exploit this set of circumstances do so by identifying a cause or scapegoat into which the fears and uncertainties can hook themselves. The totalitarian aspirants then present a structured path by which to defeat that identified cause. In this iteration of the phenomenon, an invisible microbe labelled SARS-CoV-2 is the cause, while lockdowns and ‘vaccines’ are the path to safety and clarity. And this iteration is global. It is nation states everywhere against their people.

Totalitarianism turns societies of individuals into a hypnotised mass that clings fiercely to the solution offered. Anything that threatens to break the hypnosis threatens to cast the mass back into the pit of its old fear and uncertainties. Facts and figures that contradict the narrative must be ignored or dispelled as a matter of life or death. Rather than examine their contribution to the decay and rot that defined their old normal, the hypnotised relinquish their free will to a tyrant or tyrannical group(s) offering them a shiny New Normal.

Which of us chooses the pain of humility over the comfort of pre-packaged certainties when afraid and apparently powerless in the face of what’s coming next? Who wants to be fundamentally wrong and culpable when the stakes are so high that one’s very life seems to be on the line?

Interestingly, the proportion of a people that submits fully to the hypnosis is said to be 30-35%. A further 40% or so don’t really buy into the spell cast but prefer not to voice their doubts for various reasons. The remainder is prepared to express their views and take action to some degree. To prevent totalitarianism from really taking hold and destroying most of society (totalitarianism can only fail; it is entirely dysfunctional), those who are prepared to speak out, who are willing to take action, must hit upon the most effective strategies. This is where love comes in.

The group to reach is the silent majority; those fully committed are now lost to fate. Those individuals who constitute that silent majority must be invited to engage their courage and sense of human dignity. But grass does not grow faster if you shout at it. People can feel when they are being addressed lovingly, i.e. with respect and humility. This can be in the form of conversation, in humour, and in all art forms, whether one-to-one or one-to-many.

Seven years ago, I was in a battle with my fears and self-loathing. Love, which is in fact unconditional, was the way out. The appeal I made to myself, voiced in the poem above, was a call to be totally open to reality as it is. This is the state of being we need to adopt if we are to reach those silent millions and encourage love of life to rise up in their hearts. The rhetoric on display in this article is my medium of choice but when it comes to face-to-face encounters, it is open authenticity that proves most effective. In essence, this means being prepared to be wrong, that one sees every conversation – or heated argument – as an opportunity to learn.

As society is crassly divided into bitterly opposed camps, what we need to accomplish in response is the shattering of our own fears and tensions directly and bravely into a state of open-hearted receptivity and courage. This state of being calls deeply to those ready to hear. The old cliche that we all want the same basic things is true: healthy food, healthy environment, the opportunity to develop our potential, mutual respect, freedom of movement, an effective education, trustworthy institutions, etc. The devil is always in the detail, but compromise functions best when we remember what unites us above what divides us. Diversity is the stuff of life and love, but without our awareness rooted in the unity from which diversity flows, we risk the arbitrary mob rule of scattered multitudes and its consequent pervasive fear and meaninglessness.

Reject the old normal, reject their New Normal, and commit to strong, humble openness and the beautiful creativity it brings. We will be amazed at what we can accomplish. 

Let all that is not rooted in truth and love wither and fall away.