The Elite tell us who to hate and who to love. This is their true power. They understand complex and subtle things that most of us take for granted. We’ve always imagined the biggest method of maintaining hegemony was powerful ideas, well constructed and reasonable arranged, but truthfully its emotional manipulation. Edward Bernays used his uncle Sigmund Freud’s teaching to change the official propaganda of the US into a “public relations” that garned emotional support. Even today we feel the love of Israel and the hate of Iran, coming mainly from people that have never left the US, or know a foreign language. So people are hating and loving somebody they dont know living somewhere they dont’ know, and they are doing it venehemently! While dispassionate liberal intellectuals have stopped “caring” or being MOVED by the emotional memes of the Elite, they’ve stopped caring about anything at all. They think history its running its course, which it is, but not at the hands of anyone specifically. To them, its all this giant retelling of evolution on a human scale.
The reason emotions control us is because emotions are not simply judgement– they are forms of being. We think of anger and hate or love, and their object, and we say that we feel something in relation to a judgdement we’ve made about it. I’m angry, because my friends are ignoring me, I’m resentful because i’m not being validated. We say it like “I’ve reached this conclusion, because of these facts”. Like there is still a space between Subject and Object. As if “anger” was something we aquired, like a noun. “woops looks like you found anger!” when in reality anger and resentment and love are a Mode of being. Being Angry, means doing-the-angry-thing. youre impulses re-arrange themselves to cope with the world differently. Its like you go from being in economy mode to sports mode, the redistribution of energy around the body is changed. When we’re angry, we’re performing the anger thing. When a country gets everyone to be mad at someone, then somehow in our actions of being angry, we constititute some fundamental element of our anger because we feel the very things we’re looking for. We don’t need justification to move on to our actions that are unjustified
As westerners we tend to value glottal language, which uses a combination of vocal chords and something else to bring about language. We believe that people who were able to correctly paint and draw out glottal symbols were more advanced than, say cultures that used hieroglyphics like the egyptians or used a variety of complex symbols like the aztecs. In anthropology for instance we praise the mayans for use of Yucatec Maya Language
|B’ix a bèel?||Bi’x a b’eh?||How are you?||How is your road?|
|Ma’alob’, kux tèech?||Good, and you?||Not bad, as for you?|
|B’ey xan tèen.||Same with me.||Thus also to me.|
Its as if things like the hippocrates/hermes symbol
which is a beautiful aztec symbol
means “less” than vocal words, but we find that vocal word concepts tend to die and change quickly with cultures, while central key symbols, even ones that show up in crop circles or mandalas permeate throughout all of existence.
This bias in western culture makes reading the egyptian book of the dead, and a lot of egyptian thought for that matter. To Egyptians books and uses of the tongue (RO) were meant for parchment and spells
“Most sub-texts begin with the word ro, which can mean mouth, speech, a chapter of a book, spell, utterance, or incantation. This ambiguity reflects the similarity in Egyptian thought between ritual speech and magical power. In the context of the Book of the Dead, it is typically translated as either “chapter” or “spell”.
they didn’t use RO (or speech) tell the story of life and the great supernal narrative outreaching from the heavenly 26,000 year zodiac cycle (the way that babylonians/greeks/romans did)– the temples themselves told, and lived through it. The symbols were more than speech, they were instructions and dwelling on these symbols elicits multiple things over time– in dialectical steps at times.
Here is what my Introduction to the kaballah book by moshe hallamish:
1. The Symbol is an approximation– it is as close as we can get to convey the meaning of that which in itself is indescribable.
2. the symbol is a remote echo of some essence that is unapprehensible and uncommunicable, partyl because of the inadequacy of human perception. As one Kaballist of North Africa said in the 17th century: “and you, son, take in the eseence of things, not their material aspects. For matter is but an anology to the spirit. having been created of matter, we have no recourse to comprehend the divine, the spiritual, exceept by means of a metaphor”
3.Hence the abundant, and sometimes contradictory, use of symbols, and the benefit derived from it: “even when profund matters are communicated in public, only those who are mean tto understand them, will do so”
4.The symbols themselves are revealed, so to speak, by God himself through the torah and his creation.
5. the Symbol serves not only a vehicle of expression but also as means of exerting influence on the supernal world
The symbolic approach is what brings the kabbalists together, for the kaballah is not a speculative-philosophical system in the full sense of the word. it deals with various subjects related to the divine life, the world, man and religion, but not necessarily as a coherent system. it has a wide range of views and contains conflicting ideas even aboutbasic matters. Yet there is a common denominator that unites all Kaballists and it is manifest particularly in their basic attitude toward the Symbol.”
In studying Masonic traditions we would benefit from their influence of kaballist tradition. A browsing of the Masonic encyclopedia by albert mackey shows its simularities, having a lot of the same heroes such as Peleg building the great tower of babel. It is only in ancient kaballist literature are they aware that Peleg built the tower, how are masons also familiar with it? not even a google search “who built the tower of babel” comes back with Peleg except if you search the Masonic encylcopedia. Symbolism is entrenched in Masonic ritual, the word “symbol” shows up over 2 thousand times in the encyclopedia, about 120 per letter.
Here is one example:
Freemasonry, borrowing its symbols from every source, has not neglected to make a selection of certain parts of the human body. From the back an important lesson is derived, which is fittingly developed in the Third Degree. Hence, in reference to this symbolism, 01iver says: “It is a duty incumbent on every Mason to support a brother’s character in his absence equally as though he were present; not to revile him behind his back, nor suffer it to be done by others, without using every necessary attempt to prevent it.
We must admit our ignorance to understanding symbols if we ever wish to climb any further. Thats all I can really say for now
The second I knew Rick Perry was a member of the bilderberg group I predicted this… it’s nuts that nobody thought perry had a chance 3 months ago but its already doubling and trippling http://www.newsmax.com/InsideCover/Perry-Romney-Bachmann-Rasmussen/2011/08/16/id/407537?s=al&promo_code=CD88-1 and http://www.newsmax.com/InsideCover/Perry-Romney-Bachmann-Rasmussen/2011/08/16/id/407537?s=al&promo_code=CD88-1 . ” Perry won 39 percent of the vote among Republican primary voters who identify themselves as tea party members. Bachmann came in next, with 21 percent.
even the texans against terry only boosts inversely support for perry, meanwhile the ross pero/ralph nader of this election, ron paul, is being swept under the reg.
it’s hard to see this happen, to know undoubtly what will happen in the next 2 years, a international hawkist in the white house allowing open borders, a north american union between canada and france. there isn’t a lot we can do, it feels like trying to persuade people of a conspiracy theory, because it is kind of like one. rick perry has been told by the right people to talk to the right people
The experts that he has reached out to include former Undersecretary of Defense for Policy Doug Feith, former NSC strategy guru William Luti, former Assistant U.S. Attorney and National Review columnist Andrew McCarthy, former Pentagon official Charles "Cully" Stimson, former Deputy Assistant Secretary of Defense for Europe Daniel Fata, former Pentagon China official Dan Blumenthal, the Heritage Foundation's Asia expert Peter Brookes, and former U.S. Ambassador to Afghanistan Zalmay Khalizad. Even this post only to be co-opted into the fields, another serious candidate another SEO boost. it's amazing, the ability for experts, multinational banks, and white collar technocrats to infleunce an election like this, i'm sure rick perry has his social media team planned for next year. what kind of satanic demons guiding him... i can only imagine. god help us
Incase you needed a list of the “super rich”, this is very old but still very crucial. these men from 1970-2006 ran a country without a major industry to postindustrial financialization . Good job gentlemen, mad skillz