We don’t run corporate ads. We don’t shake our readers down for money every month or every quarter like some other sites out there. We only ask you once a year, but when we ask we mean it. So, please, help as much as you can. We provide our site for free to all, but the bandwidth we pay to do so doesn’t come cheap. All contributions are tax-deductible.
Perhaps in time the so-called Dark Ages will be thought of as including our own.
— Georg C Lichtenberg
The proceeds of ‘usury’ pursued at the level of Sovereign State are the foundation stone of ‘Corporatism’ as an austere political form which has come to ‘enforce’ at a transnational/geopolitical level an economic system of distribution which marginalizes the majority from a fair share of material resources, and which further extends this marginalization as a sufferance inflicted in the corruption of Democracy thru control of the process of political representation?
That Corporatism can do ‘this’, and have it called by way of euphemism ‘free market’ or ‘neoliberal orthodoxy‘ as expression of what is undoubtedly tragedy is no mere product of ‘happenstance’; for the austerity of Corporatism is not a material austerity for all – as such ‘Corporatism’ is a form of ‘class war’ waged upon the majority by a parasitical minority who are ‘necrotrophic’ to the point that there exists an ethos tragic amongst ‘the 1%’ that there can always be ‘more’ extracted?
‘Class’ as exists within ‘Empiricism’ as an expression of ‘Technological Determinism’ – as in the concept of ‘Machine Politics’, or as Thoreau put it most succinct as to the prescience:
‘But Lo! men have become the tools of their tools’?
(One uses the term ‘the 1%’ in the above, when the reality is that what really ‘drives’ Corporatism is a much smaller percentage such as 0.001%?)
Any serious consideration (i.e. out with mere ‘Hegemony’) of the austerity prevalent throughout the Western World in the early part of the 21st Century must acknowledge a ‘transfer of resources’ at the level of economic distribution prevailing as a ‘trend’; as evident in: increasing homelessness, higher unemployment, increasing infant mortality, rising malnourishment, the increasingly incorporative concept of the ‘working poor’ by way of ’embrace’, reduced levels of home ownership, higher rates of incarceration, increased economic migrancy, lower access to health care and to further education – to name but a few indicators of the absence of ‘Life, liberty and the pursuit of happiness’ in what was ‘Once upon a time’ the American interpretation of Democracy?
(The question is not ‘Is Democracy in America Dead?’ -the question is ‘When did Democracy Die in America?’) ?
This: before we consider the concept of access to information denied and the power of Corporatist Media in corrupting honest opinion towards mere propaganda which denies truth in the encouragement of illusion thru which wars as mere rackets extrapolated are justified, the right to privacy denied, and so the right of political representation gone concerning the Majority?
One of the greatest ‘successes’ of the degenerate usurers as ‘Corporatists’ has been the abuse of control over the issue of ‘currency’ to expropriate usuriously by covet means, and it is here that America represents a veritable ‘case study’ in form of the Federal Reserve and the battle to establish it, as preceded by the ‘Elephant in the Room’ concerning the explication of control of ‘currency’ represented by the Rothschild family; a family which has come to exert control over sufficient resources, and so tightly, that it is ‘easy’ not to mention, but whom anyone with remotely serious intent to ‘comprehend’ the State of the Western World at a Geopolitical level must consider?
Voltaire’s oft attributed remark concerning rule and whom you are not allowed to criticize is apposite?
-But no more apposite than the remark attributed to Mayer Amschel Rothschild; to wit:
‘Permit me to control and issue the currency of a nation and I care not who makes its laws’?
Because when it comes to ‘austerity’ as the ‘scourge’ of the Western World in the early 21st Century, and the care not which austerity ‘builds’ upon, a consideration of the prescience of Mayer Amschel Rothschild and the control of ‘currency’ is demanded?
At such juncture, this small article becomes not so much a ‘tiptoe thru the tulips’ as a ‘tiptoe thru the minefield of psychopolitics ‘ as delineated by Eric Arthur Blair aka George Orwell, notably thru his concept of ‘Thoughtcrime’ or ‘Crimethink’ – and also by Marx in his concept of ‘Hegemony’?
For there are prohibitions of a ‘psycho political’ nature prevalent, here at this juncture in our ‘intimacy’, as reflected polymorphous in: the concept of the ‘self hating Jew’; the interpretation of ‘currency’ extending into the ideological from pragmatic basis, the concept of ‘anti semitic’ existing as much as the instinctual can prevail over the rational, or in as much as there the concept of ‘hegemony’ which a ‘bought and paid for’ concept of pragmatism, whereby the buying by a minority – and the paying for by a majority such the parasitology – as evident in the corporatist concept of ‘externalisation’?
For ‘Hegemony’ exists as much as an inequitable system of economic distribution is truly anathema to ‘Life, liberty and the pursuit of happiness’ – particularly when it is backed up by material resources expropriated to the level which can determine ‘Thoughtcrime’?
Much as ‘Hegemony’ has come to rationalize the austerity under which we, of the Western World, currently subsist to a ‘tithe’ exerted upon the mind, such the combine of the Military -Industrial (Corporatist) Complex exerts, given ‘fusion’ of Kesey with POTUS 34?
(What ‘Ken’ referred to as ‘The Combine’, ‘Ike’ referred to as the Military -Industrial Complex?)
For these small quarters can endure subsistence material; can endure the ‘apperception’ imposed as existential in as much as an increasing number of ‘things’ which support ‘Life’ – but not as we know it – are rendered ‘unaffordable’ for the majority – but what they cannot endure is the ‘tithe’ upon the mind as ultimate restraint upon ‘Life, liberty and the pursuit of happiness‘ as would be exacted upon the God given, such the light as remaining in an ‘age of Darkness’, sense of Lichtenberg, as would be made whereof innocence would die in the darkness of what amounts to no more than a mere parasitism Satanic in its ‘illumination’ as abrogation of Humanity.
Reduced to point of quintessence;(?) Life is not about the self; and to cause of failure of such realization as an ‘Omega’ or ‘enantiodromiatic’ point of transition, there continues to be so much sufferance- as any contemplation Geopolitical concerning the Western World in the 21st Century demonstrates?
Perchance Heraclites got it right when he stated ‘Everything is in Flux’; or that the ‘paradigm’ so degenerated in the Western World as to the paraphrase that ‘Everything exists to be fucked’ such the transcendence paradoxical of the dominance of the reptilian brain over the mammalian? (Consider the Medulla, consider the Pons – consider the Neo Cortex such the psychophysical parallelism?)
Then again, when POTUS 35 made reference to the Athenian lawmaker Solon he rejected ‘Hegemony’ in refusing to shrink from controversy?
‘This Land is your Land, this land is my land’ remains a great refusal to shrink from controversy?
In the willingness to share ‘some’ at least?
Apropos, real life in Democracy remains the freedom to opine out with the ‘hegemony’ as would prevail on psychopolitical grounds by way of control and manipulation; real life in Democracy is to be more than an ‘animal’ on a farm as ‘CAFO’ or a number in a ‘Panopticon’ harvested by a small minority of one’s peers to point of expropriation and arrogation to point of service of a lesser God and accordant denial of equality. (The concept of ‘morphic fields’ as enunciated by Sheldrake admirably qualifies the meaning of ‘freedom to opine’ in the above.
– It is as much, such sense to think resolution by way of revolution to affirm it, by God?)
There much obscenity in the following remark paraphrased, but which cuts to the core of the darkness of the 21st Century Western World; this case by way of ‘religion’ as providing ‘rationalization’.
“Infidels were born only to serve us. Without that, they have no place in the world – only to serve the Muslims.”
The paraphrase by way of substitution of terminology exists to illustrate the hegemony as become.
For if it were, apropos the concept of ‘Infidel‘, a Muslim who had uttered such obscenity denying Democracy, what would have been the reaction of the Corporatist media of the Western World, such the ‘thought experiment’ as variant upon ‘putting yourself in the place of another’?
At least six million condemnations reiterated to a ‘Holocaust’ or a ‘whole burnt’ as expression of hegemony?
But the fact is, it was not a Muslim who uttered such obscenity.
It was Rabbi Ovadia Josef in his Saturday Night Sermon of October 2010. (The terms in the paraphrase above substituted were ‘Goyim’ and ‘The people of Israel’. A statement of Democracy regardless it is not.)
These small quarters have a deep admiration of Democracy as a concept, as an ideal Political. Accordingly there is a loathing of ‘Apartheid’ and an embrace of, as the French put it succinctly ‘Liberté, Ėgalité, Fraternité’ .
Providing one does not advocate violence against any People then the spirit of Democracy demands that each Citizen speaks up against injustice lest they become part of that injustice. To these small quarters, this, in addition to the resonance of Solon a resonance of the wisdom of Burns, in his profound statement ‘A man’s a man for a’ that’.
Aye and a’ that, indeed?
So it goes.
Please bear such sentiment in mind as these small quarters attempt to ‘answer’ the conundrum – which being the disparity between the premise accepted that ‘Man, regardless of Nationality, is fundamentally benign’ and the State of the Western World in the early 21st Century as non benign to the point where, in an earlier unpublished article which stated the case that ‘If Satan did not exist, it would be necessary to invent him’.
Don’t know about you, but these small quarters are tired of shrinking from controversy. The very meaning of the word ‘controversy’ entails or intimates a ‘hegemony’ whereby the ‘truth’ becomes forbidden as in expression of psychopathic denial?
For the walls of the prison which the Western World become in the early 21st Century are truly hegemonic, and they would grow tighter proportionate the dominance of Corporatism as the concentrated application of resources; this as much as the walls of the prison entail a ‘tithe’ upon the mind which would have us deny the evidence of our senses – which given as our very own courtesy of something much greater?