Why I like Bitching

A lot of my posts consist of bitching about something; be it people, society or life itself. Many might say I have negative attitude, we should focus on the positive, or the solution instead of the problem. All the above criticism is more or less true, yet one cannot come up with a solution unless he knows what the problem is.

When I was younger I used to complain about many things, alas that was usually as far as it went. I was satisfied complaining instead of looking at the cause of the problem to understand the big picture. However I see that as a phase in my personal development, since now I try (usually) to look at the cause. Complaining and bitching is an integral part of making things better. The Angry Videogame Nerd who complains about bad video games, and Harry S. Plinkett of the Red Letter Media who has reviewed bad Star Trek and Star Wars movies are a great inspiration to me.

Many of us recognize it when something is wrong yet we may have a hard time understanding why it is wrong, especially if we are told by others it is good. When I saw the Star Wars prequels I thought they were bad, but I couldn’t rationally ascertain the reason why until I saw the Red Letter Media interviews. Understanding the multifaceted reasons for the suckiness of those movies was liberating. I could finally realize there is indeed something deeply wrong in the movies, and it is not merely that I am “not getting it”. The same thing goes for society. All my life I felt that existence in a Western “free” country is not freedom, yet because everybody said it’s freedom I felt confused. When I learned through various conspiracy theorists how and why we are not free I felt liberated again.

The solution is most important, of course, however the way to the solution is through hours of bitching and identifying the problem. The “love & light” people who don’t wanna look at the negative at all can fuck off.


Project Blue Beam and the Fake Alien Invasion

The conspiracy theory regarding a fake alien invasion to justify a new “war on terror” against a non-existent alien threat has been around for many years. Both in the form Project Blue Beam (along with faked religious events) and the revelations of Werner Von Braun’s secretary. I believe they have had the plan to commit such an operation, yet as it has been public knowledge in “alternative” media and conspiracy circles for quite some time, it is doubtful they would go on with the operation as it says on the tin.

In recent years there have been more and more UFO sighting reported in main stream media, scientists saying not only that it is likely ET life exists but conjecturing on the nature of such life, and the Catholic church admitting they believe in the existence of aliens. I’d say they are seeding the minds of the public to accept the idea of ET life, and most probably a skewed understanding of it. The Illuminati (or whoever agency you wish to call them) are planning on having some sort of disclosure in the near future. By near future I don’t mean a few months, but a few years. Within 10 years. When that disclosure comes, whether in form of an attack, a peaceful contact with ETs, or a some sort of official admission from earth governments, it’s bound to be fake somehow. A psyop of some sort.

The aliens may be real, but we are told lies about their origin and agenda. The aliens may be completely fake. Perhaps they reveal existence of many races, some of them supposedly good and others bad, while in fact it’s more like the reverse. I don’t know. What I do know they are professional liars so they mix truth with lies, and tell half-truths to lead people onto a wild goose chase. I will be difficult, if not important to tell what is the truth, but we must understand there will be lies.

There is no way to prepare for this. When the disclosure happens, whatever form it will take, will be quite unexpected, as it is with almost all false flags and psyops. All we can do is prepare mentally for the event as it will probably be quite shocking, either as something negative like an attack, or seemingly positive such as a “saviour” race. Don’t buy into it, but pay attention.

Are Past Life experiences downloaded from the Cloud?

There’s a guy, Alan John Miller or AJ, in Australia who claims to be Jesus reborn. He supposedly has memories of the crucifixion. This article, which can be found at the end of this post, says he’s got some followers. While the initial reaction is, naturally, that is he is a fake or crazy, let’s look at it from another angle. What if he’s being honest?

I am not saying he is the Jesus Christ, especially since I doubt he actually ever existed, yet the memories Alan John Miller has might be genuine in some sense. Think about Morphic Fields again or the Akashic Record, or simply some level of consciousness, memory and experience that every human being has some connection to. What if this AJ has merely downloaded or channeled information from this information level into his own mind and interprets it in a certain way based on his cultural programming? Maybe he actually has memories of someone who was crucified by the Romans 2000 years ago, or either he has accessed the information package of the crucifixion of Christ which may or may not ever have existed in history, but certainly has existed in the collective consciousness of countless Christians. Suppose the information he believes to have experienced merely came to his head from the “internet cloud” of consciousness. A popular meme of human consciousness. It’s origin may be an actual event, or merely an idea, something someone invented once, but in the end it doesn’t matter if it’s “real” or not as long as people experience it as real.

I don’t know much about this Alan John Miller guy. I’ve only read a single article about him, but I’ve heard similar stories before. Be it merely past life experiences or something more profound. Some of them are probably fake, but some may be honest, yet misleading in the message as our experiences and interpretations are coloured by the culture we grew up in. It’s been well documented that many people have past life experiences, some of their descriptions have even been found to have been accurate. Yet the idea that one body dies, then the soul is reborn in another may be simplified. The soul and the body are not separate, in my understanding. The past life memories that people have are not then simply memories of a soul, a non-corporeal personality, but perhaps accidentally attached to an information construct that is recycled into usage with a new body. The old memories are a by-product.

The reborn Christ AJ supposedly helps people deal with their emotions and so on. Maybe he actually does some good, and isn’t in it just for the money or the sense of having power over other people. In a sense he might be genuine, even if what he is saying in not technically true.

Still, to me he seems a bit creepy, and I wouldn’t trust him. But maybe it’s just me. Maybe I was Machiavelli or Brutus in my past life and have trouble thinking that somebody doesn’t have a hidden agenda.

The article: http://www.chrisspivey.co.uk/?p=12216

Imprisoned by Numbers

Almost our entire life is controlled by time and money, both of which are merely numbers. Every day we have to go to work and spend time to gain money. The majority of jobs seem to have some preset time period we have to be at the workplace even if we aren’t working. Society wants us to waste our time instead of actually do something. There are plenty of jobs where you simply have to get the job done at your own pace rather than sitting 9 to 5 in the office. Yet most assignments have a deadline. We waste our precious time to get money, which is merely numbers. We need money to eat, to have a place to sleep, to have fun, to interact with other people, especially with opposite sex in the form of going on a date.

We are imprisoned by simply the idea that these numbers are important and we have to do our best to hold onto them. And in order to be able to hold onto them we have to follow the rules of society. If we break the rules we are penalized by taking away some of our numbers. You do something wrong and you have to pay a fee. You do something even worse and you have to go to prison to waste a few years doing nothing. However if we are both obedient and smart we can get more numbers than others. We can have free time or lots of money which gives us freedom, we are told. These pursuits have the effect of making us not even want the system, since we just want the reward while avoiding the punishment. We don’t actively do anything to fight against our oppressive governments and corporation since doing so would cost a lot of our time and it would hurt our job, i.e. we wouldn’t get as much money as before.

In the past the control system employed more direct threats, such as violence and death. You either obey the king or you are killed. You obey the church or you burn in hell. Such practices are used today as well, but seems nowadays all they need is numbers to make people obedient.

Time is particularly insidious. Our time is divided into two types: free time and work time. Free time is supposed to be fun, and if we aren’t having fun during free time we are wasting it. Work time is supposed to be boring, but that boredom will earn us money. We tend to avoid using our intelligence too much during fun time, since we need it during work time (at least some jobs), so we associate using our intelligence with work, therefore think it is boring to use it. We also have to sleep, and usually when we sleep we do it during fun time, thus wasting it. Therefore we do not necessarily want to sleep as much as we should so we can be more efficient with fun. This, of course, isn’t very healthy.

Money is an abstract concept. It is simply stupid our society is so obsessed with it. Money isn’t evil, nor do we necessarily have to get rid of it. It is a tool, and in the right hands a tool can be used for good, and in the wrong hands it will be used for evil. However, our society thinks the tool is actually our God. That is silly.

By recognizing our obsession with these numbers we can unslave ourselves from their grasp.

Save us from the Curse of Middle-Aged Men

Society is dominated by middle-aged men, not all physically and chronologically middle-aged men, but mentally. They believe in society, the values, beliefs and customs. They understand society isn’t perfect, yet they will do anything to protect it. They care about their family and job, and are generally good at facing problems in their personal lives rationally and practically, be they economic, family or job related, or simply fixing a broken household appliance (although nowadays more and more people only believe they are like this). As they tend to act rationally, fix broken things and gradually improve things to become better, they expect society to work the same way. They project their own beliefs and patterns of behaviour onto other people, and abstract ideas like society, and expect everyone to be the same. They are well-meaning individuals, yet they lack empathy. Most of them are kind, or at least very rarely cruel, still it does not mean they are empathic. They do not understand the behaviour and emotion of others. That makes them dangerous in some ways.

The middle-aged man listens to his superiors, whether they be in the workplace or the government as he expects them to be as rational and well-meaning as he is. He cannot fathom the motivations of a psychopath on the top scheming to exterminate or enslave his family further, nor does he understand artistic and girly behaviour of certain people. The middle-aged man gets an order from the top which seems suspicious, such as carbon tax or building weapons, he might grumble about it, but he does as he is told, since he assumes the one giving the order has a good reason to do so, otherwise he wouldn’t be doing it. After all our society is a just one, and the ones on top are the guiding force in our society. Middle-aged men are effective cogs in a big machine.

These middle-aged men are not necessarily literally middle-aged men. They may be younger or older men, or even women. A couple of years ago I talked with one guy, who was 20-something yet displayed attributed of middle-aged manness. We were discussing about oil companies and the like, how they hold back the development of new energy technologies. Cold fusion came up. I probably said something like we might have eco-friendly cold fusion plants if they were allowed to freely develop it. The guy said that according to his understanding cold fusion is possible, and it’s known but the reason they aren’t implementing it is it’s not economically viable. Too expensive. If it’s practically free energy, shouldn’t it be economically a very good idea in the long run? I guess it didn’t occur to the guy’s middle-aged mind that the whole economic system is fake; manufactured in order to keep such potentially liberating technologies in check, and help the dominating energy industries. He just seemed very complacent in his certainty that it’s not economically a good idea to use cold fusion, even though it works.

These middle-aged men are the epitome of complacency. They believe in their construct of society, this abstract machine that has to keep running, slowly, gradually but it has to keep going forward, it does not occur to them, they might be wrong. Or that perhaps the machine should stop, change direction, do a silly little or something else every now and then. Complacent stubbornness. “We’ve already driven 5km down this road, it must be here.”

It’s very aggravating dealing with these people, and realizing how much harm they are causing while believing they are doing good.

Environmental Newspeak

The way how language is used in environmental movements is misleading, and stupid. “Save the whales!” “Protect the environment!” It makes nature sound like a disabled weak idiot who cannot take care of itself, and the human beings sounds like omnipotent (or at least the most potent force on this planet) heroes or villains. The whales do not need saving, we simply have to stop slaughtering them. Nature does not need our protection, we simply need to cease our various activities of destroying them. The language makes environmentalists sound like action heroes. Bruce Willis parachutes into a burning building through the window and shoots the bad guys, while avoiding the hostages. That’s not how it works. “Saving” or “protecting” the environment is not an action we must take, on the contrary is merely means we must stop countless of our actions that are harmful to nature. The problem is, it doesn’t sound cool and heroic to stop doing something.

The ego needs incentive to start rallying the cause of environmentalism. Fighting the evil corporations is heroic. Corporations are a force to be hated, something to justify your existence, such as in history many other attributes have taken the place of the dreaded other; ranging from heretics and pagans to people of other colour or ideology. In such a juxtaposition of us vs them you never want to eliminate the opponent. You want them to be there to justify your hatred, you want them to live on so you can keep on fighting. You enjoy causing them pain, is they do not exist you cannot do that. Alternatively you enjoy being hurt by them as it makes you feel like a martyr suffering for a cause.

Nature is the most powerful force that every rational human being knows to exist. Concepts like God, fate, destiny may be more powerful, but their existence is disputed by many, whereas nature is not. As it is so powerful, it is more powerful than humanity, in fact we human beings are part of nature, despite many “civilized” notions that we’re not. Therefore it does not need us as a saviour. Nature has created many wonderful creatures, things and systems that we can never compete with. The only thing where we come close to, perhaps even surpass, nature is destruction and disruption of harmony. Nature is very adept at creating harmony, which is something civilized humans have hard time even recognizing. All we need to do is cease our activities of mass destruction and disruption. That is how we “protect” nature.

What this means in practice is finding out the cause for this disruption, such as corporate and governmental greed. Why the corporations and governments keep engaging in their greedy actions of destruction is that the people allow it. Why they allow it because they are apathetic and ignorant. Why they are apathetic and ignorant is that they expect someone else to tell them what to do or how to act, instead finding it out themselves. If you care about nature do not join Greenpeace or any other environmental organization. All they do is make you a foot soldier for amassing monetary and political power. They are part of the problem. Part of the system of disruption. Find out things for yourself, and eventually you will meet people, real people, not tools these organizations with whom you can communicate. Do not demand that the corporations act with a conscience, rather ask why do we need corporations in the first place.

Who are the true Conspiracy Theorists?

A couple of months ago, shortly after the Boston Bombings I got into an argument on Facebook about the bombings looking like a false flag and one guy disputing all such possibility. Then he mentioned something about the alleged killing of Osama Bin Laden a few years back. I said how it was obviously not true since there was no evidence of Bin Laden being called and then he was conveniently buried at sea according to a non-existent Muslim tradition. The guy I was arguing with accepted the official story simply because, according to him, for it to be a lie there would have to be countless people involved in the conspiracy to fake the death of Bin Laden (even though they didn’t even fake it, they just said he was killed). The guy accused me of being a conspiracy theorist, when in fact he was the one inventing baseless conspiracy theories. In my mind the case is simple: they claim they killed Bin Laden, yet they produce no evidence, so I have a hard time accepting they story as true, especially since the claim is made by the US government that I found to be one of the most untrustworthy entities on this planet. I don’t know all the participants, motivations and the variables that lead to the unbelievable claim of Bin Laden being killed in some raid in Pakistan, I just know they made a claim with no evidence to back it up. For all I know there is a vast conspiracy reaching all the way up to the moon simply to fake the killing of Bin Laden, or the story was invented by one guy who managed to convince countless others to believe it. I wouldn’t want to make assumptions about something like that. All I know there is an outrageous claim, no evidence; so why should I believe it? Yet the guy who is very anti-conspiracy theories makes his own baseless conspiracy theory consisting of countless people he’s invented, who must be in on the conspiracy if the Bin Laden killing event is a lie, and then he debunks it and concludes the official story must be true. He comes up with a ludicrous story only so he can say it’s ludicrous and therefore anyone who disputes the official story must be crazy and wrong. Does it make sense?

I remember soon after the Bin Laden killing I got into an argument with some other people, all smart university students (like me). I said the same thing that I don’t buy the story because no evidence was provided. The academics simply snapped at me that they couldn’t lie about something like that. They’re not even fans of the US military escapades, they just don’t want to question the status quo, I guess. People like that prove quite neatly that they can get away with all sorts of lies.

A few days ago I was googling info about Global Warming. One site said something like Global Warming cannot be fake, because if it was there would have to be so many different people lying about it, so it must be true. Once again create a conspiracy theory only to debunk it to maintain the status quo. The formula seems to be: someone questions official dogma, we cannot have that. Phase 1. Create conspiracy theory. Phase 2. Debunk the conspiracy theory. Phase 3. Status quo vindicated.

It’s not about facts, evidence or the truth with these people. It’s about the consensus. According to the consensus complex conspiracies cannot exist. Claim that for X to be true, there would have to be a massive conspiracy, therefore X cannot be true. Consensus maintained. One should not look at the evidence as they might shake the validity of the consensus. Despite their claims of caring about science, the majority of baseless conspiracy theories seems to come from academics and wannabe-intellectuals. Here I speak of conspiracy theories in the definition used in the main stream i.e. something along the lines of a ridiculous, baseless claim of a conspiracy with little evidence to back it up. Whereas most of us who are actually interested in conspiracy fact, are ridiculed as conspiracy theorists.

I propose a new term to compete with the aptly named “co-incidence theorist”. I add “consensus theorist” to the vocabulary (even though seems the term exists already, but I do not know whether the meaning is the same). The consensus theorist does not look at evidence, fact or even personal experience or intuition. Rather the consensus theorist believes that what is regarded true by the consensus is true by the virtue of the consensus saying it is true. Maybe their religion is Status Quotism.