like this

Jlb tries talking to Yossarian, Farcevalue

Perhaps the footage quality of hoaxes and is created deliberately inferior so as not to arouse suspicion that Hollywood itself is creating the video. An example of this is the movie with Mister Sandra Bullock called Gravity, which was created with very high quality video as an example to compare and contrast against lesser quality video from .

No tags for this post.

4 thoughts on “FAC404-JLB

  1. farcevalue

    Not sure about the “laws” (i.e. opinions backed by true believing zealots who will use violence against peaceful people to enforce them), but in the US it is mandated that children are placed in schools for quite a long time.
    Similarly, it is mandated that cars are registered and “drivers” so-called, possess licenses issued by the state. These are just two examples of many mandates that are enforced with violence. There are many prohibitions against living off the grid here (collecting rain water, detaching from the local power grid, gardening, building codes, etc.)
    You could argue that these requirements could be ignored and we are free to do as we please regardless. It is rumored that some people have had some success avoiding these state mandates by spending time in the state court system. Nevertheless, on a practical level, to do so, even for the so-called winners of such cases is to set oneself up for an unending series of interactions with enforcement authorities on a daily basis.
    You may argue that having kids or driving are not required, and the choice to drive or procreate is a choice to serve the (evil) system. There is in reality no choice. If one has the desire to procreate they can enter into a mutually consensual relationship where progeny is the result. A driver can contract with another party to trade (maybe something intangible such as good will) for a car. The problems arise with the unauthorized and arbitrary third party known as the state that will use violence to take property and liberty from those who refuse to comply with its mandates.
    This is where the kidnapping analogy holds. In reality, a plantation analogy would be more accurate, as the plantation owners are presiding over second or third generation chattel who were born in captivity; the actual kidnapping occurred in generations past.
    It is said that after a baby elephant has been chained to a stake that it can later as an adult be restrained with a light rope, as it has learned to perceive the restraint as impossible to break.
    It can’t be denied that serious effort is employed by the media and education systems to entrain the minds of people into particular ways of perception and thought. The whole point of this site is to identify the manipulation for what it is. The very fact that manipulation is employed is an indication that the manipulators recognize themselves as those with the right to to so. I challenge that right and submit that were the manipulators required to live under the conditions brought about by their schemes that others are forced and/or persuaded (defrauded) to live under, they would find it objectionable.
    Whether one decides to call it evil is a personal choice. It is certainly an irrational, inconsistent system that favors certain groups over others through the use of aggressive violence. Perhaps it would be better to argue for a world based on rational consistency.

    1. farcevalue

      Another neglected aspect of the “go live in the woods” idea is again that of taxation. In the US the IRS claims the right to tax barter. If two people were to decide to go live in the woods and one were to dig a well and the other were to chop firewood and they pooled the resources to cook and what not, the IRS could technically convert those trades to dollar equivalencies and demand payment in USD for some arbitrary amount. Granted, this is unlikely, but they claim this right just the same.
      One could choose to ignore them, which it is best to do whenever possible, but once you have evidence of law enforcement types regularly inflicting various forms of physical and property damage to peaceful individuals it becomes a bit self-destructive to assume that those instances will always be relegated to others. If people want to apply the term evil to third parties who show up at transactions demanding payment without consideration using threats and coercion I see no contradiction or hypocrisy.

  2. farcevalue

    In regard to JLB’s hypocrisy charge for those who persist in the money system and use the word evil to describe the controllers:
    A kidnapping analogy would be comparable. Can a kidnap victim call their kidnappers evil if they were to eat the food proffered by the kidnappers in order to stay alive? Of course. As they are not the architects of the kidnapping and are subjected to circumstances of confinement beyond their control, whatever they do to survive is justified and their kidnappers can be classified as evil regardless. Do the circumstances change if the victim is bound to a chair, has a 20′ chain around their ankle, is confined within a large area by a fence or has been transported to an island against their will? No. They are still confined by a system not of their own making.

    1. John le Bon

      A kidnapping analogy would be comparable.

      Here are three problems I see with the ‘kidnapping’ analogy:

      1) We generally think of kidnappers as doing us harm. They are by their nature our enemies. The entire point of my line of questioning is to establish how we know or why we believe the people who run the show (TPWRTS) are our enemies. In other words, this analogy engages in circular reasoning.

      To make my point clear, it is like somebody saying, ‘How do we know person X is a thief?’, and somebody else saying, ‘Well a bank robbing analogy would be comparable’. Circular.

      2) A kidnap victim, we might imagine, has no choice but to comply, lest they be killed on the spot. In this reality, however, none of us are forced to go to work or to spend money. Some people claim that they are forced to do so, and I ask them, ‘what happened when you tried to get away from the system?’ Invariably the truth of the matter is that they have never really tried.

      None of us are forced to play our parts in the system. Any of us could go and try to live off the land tomorrow if we really wanted to. Until somebody has actually tried, how can they claim that they have no choice?

      Many of us feel compelled to stay in the system by responsibilities to children/family, and these are things we have brought upon ourselves. With very rare exception, nobody forced any of us to copulate and produce more humans. Where does the responsibility for this situation sit? I say with us, as individuals. And who would argue with me? ‘I say it is the system’s fault I had kids’. Give me a break.

      3) If we were to press ahead with the analogy despite the two problems cited above, it would be worth, at the very least, modifying it to more closely match the behaviour of the average person/’truther’. By giving our finite time and energy (i.e. our lives) to the system, we are not tied up in the boot/trunk of the car, but helping drive the car to the next destination. If we are having children, we are planning and executing the next kidnapping.

      Like I said: those who TRULY believe that TPWRTS are evil/bad, and yet give their finite time and energy (lives) to the system, for the system’s money, are nothing but minions. Willing and active participants in the very hell they believe themselves to have somehow wound up in.

      What a horrible outlook. Not just horrible but truly horrific.

      No wonder so many ‘truthers’ (call them whatever you want) are so angry all the time, always looking to start heated arguments with strangers online. Getting triggered like pavlovian dogs by the faintest of scrutiny of their premises. The amount of stress within them must be through the roof. Cognitive dissonance personified.

      If I truly believed TPWRTS were evil, and yet gave my life to their system, and brought other innocent humans into this realm, I would probably be pretty angry, too. I would probably try to direct my anger at others. To blame other people for what I had done and was doing. To put responsibility on everybody but myself. To create fictional boogeymen and ascribe all of the world’s ills to them rather than to my own actions.

      It all makes so much sense now. Minions deep down in their own minds.

      No wonder.

Leave a Reply

This site uses Akismet to reduce spam. Learn how your comment data is processed.