![[personal profile]](https://www.dreamwidth.org/img/silk/identity/user.png){kind=small}
Entry tags:
Open (More or Less) Post on Covid 56
As we move further into the second year of these open posts, it's pretty clear that the official narrative is cracking as the toll of deaths and injuries from the Covid vaccines rises steadily and the vaccines themselves demonstrate their total uselesness at preventing Covid infection or transmission. It's still important to keep watch over the mis-, mal- and nonfeasance of our self-proclaimed health gruppenfuehrers, and the disastrous results of the Covid mania, but I think it's also time to begin thinking about what might be possible as the existing medical industry reels under the impact of its own self-inflicted injuries. So it's time for another open post. The rules are the same as before:
1. If you plan on parroting the party line of the medical industry and its paid shills, please go away. This is a place for people to talk openly, honestly, and freely about their concerns that the party line in question is dangerously flawed and that actions being pushed by the medical industry et al. are causing injury and death. It is not a place for you to dismiss those concerns. Anyone who wants to hear the official story and the arguments in favor of it can find those on hundreds of thousands of websites.
2. If you plan on insisting that the current situation is the result of a deliberate plot by some villainous group of people or other, please go away. There are tens of thousands of websites currently rehashing various conspiracy theories about the Covid-19 outbreak and the vaccines. This is not one of them. What we're exploring is the likelihood that what's going on is the product of the same arrogance, incompetence, and corruption that the medical industry and its tame politicians have displayed so abundantly in recent decades. That possibility deserves a space of its own for discussion, and that's what we're doing here.
3. If you plan on using rent-a-troll derailing or disruption tactics, please go away. I'm quite familiar with the standard tactics used by troll farms to disrupt online forums, and am ready, willing, and able -- and in fact quite eager -- to ban people permanently for engaging in them here. Oh, and I also lurk on other Covid-19 vaccine skeptic blogs, so I'm likely to notice when the same posts are showing up on more than one venue.
4. If you don't believe in treating people with common courtesy, please go away. I have, and enforce, a strict courtesy policy on my blogs and online forums, and this is no exception. The sort of schoolyard bullying that takes place on so many other internet forums will get you deleted and banned here. No, I don't care if you disagree with that: my journal, my rules.
With that said, the floor is open for discussion.
Re: a note
(Anonymous) 2022-09-02 01:45 am (UTC)(link)i'm sorry that i don't remember WHY switching up evil is such a great idea, but Hearthspirit is correct: it's forcing me to take this HELLA seriously and i am especially because SHE gets it. Understanding, daring to Understand, is a later part of all this somehow.
i'm not feeling the walls in the dark, i'm feeling along the BASEBOARDS in the dark here...
so i was wondering "WHY is it 'important' to switch up concepts of evil?"
then i realized why i used the morlocks vs hawks: because the morlocks used out-of-date HABITS to enslave and eat the elois.
and as Hearthspirit wrote: the innerwebs trashed my comments to force me to take this seriously so i AM...
and thus: THEY ARE USING OUR MORALITY AGAINST US OURSELVES...
and why? Giacometti-me WHY?...WHY?... get me beneath the bone...
and I visited here and saw a post for The Gent from Ghent (i write that to buy time to remember his name...Mattias! Of course: Mattias Desmet, in his new substack, he lays out what seems to be the theme of his new book (cool, so it's not just a fluffing up and filling in of his Mass Formation idea), and it's about WHY someone like an Edward Bernays could refine his propaganda techniques in an era of intense mechanization.
i haven't read the book but i SHALL now, and i'm hoping that what he's on about, his area of This Elephant, is that he sees WHAT APPROACH IS NEEDED NOW.
as i'd said before: ANTI-Edward Bernays. no one likes to use an anti- or go against, it's all "positive" positive to portray us as alpha but it's a LIE. Edward Bernays called everyone in his family "stupid!" and he felt the same about The World he was shuckin' and jivin'.
so as James reminded me, "it's simple. it's we wanna be the party everyone's drawn to."
yeah. that's IT. i keep forgetting.
but NO. because back to Understanding. it's a BIG part of this all somehow. and just like love is a meaningless verb now, so is Understanding. and yet when Hearthspirit did it and when Papa G informed me he wasn't culling my posts, i felt LOVE and not like slinking away but going FURTHER...
i'm looking for the anti-edward bernays for the opening NOW and this is part of a much larger conversation we're ALL having and for the first time without forcing myself, i got quite EXCITED...
and i'm trying to find out OUR equivalent of how to role play non violence like the freedom riders did. how do you role play Real Life in the moment?
because now one of the things i remember going away from the FIRST dispatch that went missing here, was my response to Murmuration, and how he'd given me MORE than he knew in coming straight up to me as Himself. he'd said he "practices [living fully emotionally] for later" ... and i'd said "there is no Later / it's NOW" kinda thing. we're practicing here for out THERE because people CRAVE IT...
and the next american civil war will not be won with guns but with some kind of mash up of Understanding with ... it USED TO BE "ridicule" but that just makes it easier for us to take more punches and it makes them only MORE angry...
so we win by being The Fun Ones (AKA The Pretty Ones) but if they run the world and are terrified and lock everything down?
Desmet talks about the beaurocratic totalitarianism...
just like the blood demon stories of steiner, i think the way to wake up people to their souls was POW! emotion love FEELING...
so even and ESPECIALLY as i read Mattias Desmet's opening thesis, i think of The Artist The Thinker The Mage... and why we're here at Papa G's Thang, and we are UP, y'all...
but back to Murmuration's insistence that he'd practice "later"... THIS IS "LATER."
and since they use OUR MORALITY AGAINST US, and see themselves hawks, and we get it don't you LIE... and if you play with what is evil and good...
see how pulling ONE thread upends an entire society of LIES? we're up. Edward Bernays' period of mechanization and ...
what do i KNOW? nothing nothing nothing... just that i'm fine with the posts disappearing because in the wrong mind set, you cannot come back so easily, if at all.
but this Erica Jong quote once hit me like that idea of Love becoming a force as strong as any wind fire or storm. this is NO LIE and why Everything Sucks Now:
"Love is everything it's cracked up to be. That's why people are so cynical about it. It really is worth fighting for, being brave for, risking everything for. And the trouble is, if you don't risk anything, you risk even more.”
roll your eyes all you want. you're LYING.
"i'm done playing." that's my new saying about ALL THIS. i'm done playing.
if it's so corny, why does Murmuration wanna practice it LATER? why does Scotlyn think it's TOO PERSONAL to speak of publicly?
this has also to do with some of Transactional Analysis stuff of "crossing the transaction" and good writing good art good conversation and thinking... the marrow...
so admitting the love crosses the transaction because coolness is death detachment lack of life...
also back to Hearthspirit's revelation she shared here about twisting your own sadomasochistic tendencies in your favor.
hope this makes sense.
will send three times and save it.
x
erika
Re: a note
I am so glad to see you back here! xx
"THEY ARE USING OUR MORALITY AGAINST US OURSELVES"
I, too, have often thought about times when people's best traits get weaponised (by someone) against them. Which can be like being caught in a magic mirror spell, where you begin to see yourself as the other sees you, instead of looking AT them out of your own eyes. And you cannot break that spell without giving up the mirror (ie - that other person's "seeing" of you) - and the fascination that your reflection/image exerts upon you, and taking up the task of "seeing" OUT of your eyes, for yourself, and looking BACK.
Anyway, I still think that there is a mis-remembering going on here of a conversation you and I had a ways back...
First: "THIS is why we're collectively not gonna get outta this in the west. this and Scotlyn thinking talking about love is WAAAAY too intimate when it's EVERYTHING and why we're cutting ourselves apart up and away from each other."
To whicH (me): "...I do not recall saying that 'talking about love is WAAAAY too intimate..' What I recall saying is that a love story with another person in it is a story that may not be mine to tell. It is also their story, and I tend to tread carefully around the telling of another person's story. Partly this is how I've trained myself to treat every single thing that happens in my clinic. But it is also that too many people get spoken FOR, or spoken ABOUT, and they get no 'right of reply'..."
And today: "why does Scotlyn think it's TOO PERSONAL to speak of publicly?"
To which I say, Erika, why do you want me to strip OTHER PEOPLE of THEIR clothes and make THEM naked before you?
Me, I'm here. Strip me naked, if you wish... and let us love one another. Them, they are not here. They cannot speak for themselves. They cannot consent, say yea or nay, to their (proposed) nakedness, and I will not put them on show, for anyone's gratification. Love stories *with other people in them* are not mine to share.
That is my morality. Will you use it against me?
Re: a note
(Anonymous) 2022-09-02 06:40 pm (UTC)(link)i have no idea what you mean about these "other people." that must be some other conversation i don't remember. i'd liked what you'd said in a conversation we'd had about love. i looked for the old post but gave up after a few minutes so:
i absolutely promise both you and me, that i will not anymore use your name as an example in ANYTHING more i say here because i have NO idea what you're defending yourself against with me but this is NOT about stripping anyone bare or using your morality against you!
i'm looking for something ELSE entirely, Scotlyn.
so please excuse me for any transgressions or misunderstanding, and i hope that everything is still intact.
(apologetic smile)
x
Re: a note
Still, a person wishes to be understood. Well, I do, and I'm sure you do, as well. (This is never guaranteed, though). So, yes, misunderstanding happens, although if it happens, it does not NEED to be forgiven, since it is natural for different people to see and hear things differently. This is WHY conversation... this is our art, this is our "techne"... let us use it and build what bridges to understanding that we can.
What I remember is that you and I discussed love, and I gave some examples of getting a person to "drop their armour" (maybe not in those words, but that was what had resonated for me from what you had been saying - I had been thinking much on what Wilhelm Reich had written) while teaching tai chi standing exercises, and maybe there was something else I used as an example.
You commented that none of my examples contained another person. That is to say, they were ABOUT love, and intimacy, but not about me+another human being. Which was true. And when I thought about it, I realised (and said to you) that I would not share stories containing other people, because those stories do not belong to me. This is, for me, a sacred trust.
What you heard was me saying that this is all too "private" and "intimate" to talk about, which, is not even necessarily *wrong*. But, maybe, I think, it misses out the fact that privacy and intimacy can originate in respect for what belongs to other people, and not only, or not necessarily, in fear, or even in "prissyness" which is, I sense, where you locate it.
Of course, I wish that my full meaning had gotten across in that conversation... :) But, if it did not, or cannot, so be it. It would not be BECAUSE of any wrongdoing on your part. It would just be one of those things that happen because people are different, have different histories, different perspectives, and that is the reality in which we try to use our words to cross over and connect.
Always BE who you are, just as hard as you can be, Erika, and please never stop *looking back* at the world through your own eyes, no matter what you see in the carnival mirror others hold up to you! xx