The Fabian Society
(www.omegatimes.com)
Comments (13)
sorted by:
Interesting read. It is treason for all of them.
My thought...how could normal free minded humans with souls think these philosophies are acceptable in treating your fellow human beings?
How could sane honest people want to oppress others with socialism, knowing it is unfair and unjust?
I am really struggling with understanding this.
It's not socialism, it has rarely been achieved historically, this is globalism. Owning everything, or capitalising off of it. Socialism is a buzzword, often shouting, diversity, and opportunity but has failed to ever provide it. Instead it has achieved globalism in the form of credit and even more debt. Where you're also still trying to understand the benefits of a nation who cannot even feed its own population but instead relies solely on the debts of another. Any other socialists, are often even more oppressed, by some other form of tyranny.
What I struggle with is this society and the people to subscribe to its beliefs.
What person in their right mind, with just a modicum of human decency would believe that their beliefs will benefit mankind?
How could anyone believe that oppressing others is some how the appropriate way to treat others.
I imagine the WEF people sitting around discussing the things they put out and think how can they look at each other and think "Yea, this is going to help people". They have to either be sociopathic, lunatics, or not human.
It's not about helping people, it's about bettering yourself. It's the only rationality they have adopted. They want and need to control everything. Then society is how they intended. More for them of course. Geed rules the planet. They take a good intention, and corrupt it into their own. Because they sold their souls along long time ago. Or please convince me how they gained another intention.
Socialism isn't about helping people. What a load of bullshit. It's about controlling them all into the same power structures. Of course there are socialists, but these tend to be people away from civilization, and they aren't very sociable. But they live, trade, and whatever rather equally in the broader sense of it. There have been other attempts at it, but power corrupts.
Socialism today is either globalism, or tyranny. It's never anything else. Globalism has become tyranny. What kind of an idiot let's those people feed them. But their government does.
Benefit to mankind, hahaha, mankind was doing just fine without it. I mean seriously it's such an absurdly fictitious ideal of some quasi messiah, but but I taught them all math. No sooner did they get screwed. Or what? You invented the phone to hear all of them? Come on. Benefit to mankind. It was fine before and now it's probably going extinct. If these socialist would have it even sooner. But at least they're driving the EVs. Yawn.
Helping people to help you. I mean you got paid, you gained fame. Or are you really genuine? Some kind of teacher, writer, or simply religious? Perhaps even more useless a singer, painter, chef? It simply isn't found in so many cultures. Instead there is this blissful naivety you've provided something else. Perhaps because by larger comparison poor people of certain backgrounds and cultures are often more generous, rich people often didn't become it by being anything else to anybody else. A proven argument, who helps you first, culturally, you can literally knock on a poor person's door, they will provide, but a rich person will often turn you away. Philanthropy has nothing to do with it. Attitude. Of course I am not talking about begging. But genuinely in need. A timeless argument of the ages, nothing has changed, it's simply greedier. I should finish that thought. No need. But hardly western culture, possession and gain have caused the pursuit of, the removal of religion has caused, no, not always, depends on the locality. Certain people will always swear to benevolence of their benefactor, and the wickness of their class. Because fiction often provides something else. The expectancy of some other movie or vivid dream. All part of the con at betterment. The argument still holds. But suddenly you expected socialism to create equality. Nope?
Only the few suggesting the -isms can define; redefine and contradict them; while the consenting many can only reason (want vs not want; true vs false; believing vs not believing; is vs isn't etc.) among each other about the suggested meaning.
Have you ever defined an -ism for the many? How could your suggestion reach them without a mass communication infrastructure? Does the world wide web represents such an infrastructure and was it suggested by the few towards the consenting many?
How could a perceivable "it" aka something; be a "not" aka nothing?
They are above the law. No national laws governs them, but their own. They are a country, within a country. Not answering to local government. Perhaps the Monarchy? Although they probably don't even care. Because their's is a particularly special contract with the Crown granting them extraordinary circumstances. It goes back for centuries. Today, it goes beyond simple borders, and they'd as easily set up shop in another profitable venture. If it weren't for the protections afforded. It's not the Fabian society, I refer too. But their backers/financiers mentioned.
Questionably could Congress hold the FED treasonous. Whoops what went wrong? Does not compute, collapse. And if it got a bright idea, I know I know, we will make the people's bank of our own national reserve, there's another assassination?
The few suggest the laws of men aka the rules of behavior for the many who consent to submit to the suggested.
Everyone exists within the laws of nature; as the ones perceiving within all perceivable, as choice (free will) within balance (need/want); as form (life) within flow (inception towards death); as temporary resistance (living) within the ongoing natural order of velocity (dying).
The many ignore to grow within perceivable; hence lowering themselves underneath the suggestions of the few; who parasitically exploit mass ignorance with suggestion, as the merchants of temptation, utilizing choice (suggestion) towards choice (consent) contract law.
They are literally above the law almost on the same scale of the Queen is exempt from prosecution. But not quite.
Seriously they stone wall. Sure they might provide a scapegoat, if it hits the fan. But they're practically exempt. Unless they commit cold blooded murder or some other national violation. But when it comes to anything else mundane, not a chance.
I think it goes back to the Norman conquest of London. They struck a deal as the rest of London was invaded. To this day they remain quite sovereign.
Huge thing about it, not many know of it. Most have seen it. The London mile. They have their own mayor, police force, and territory. Research it, instead of providing definitions. It's similar to the Vatican. But this is banks, and corporate investment, tax havens, and heaps of proxies.
Conspiracies abound. Yea it's a documentary in any event.
When you say it like that you imply your belief in "the law" above us and them. That law was suggested by the few and consented to by the belief of the many.
Ask yourself why "they" can use their free will of choice to stand above "the law" if the law governs us and them? What if choice is bound to a different law...to natural law?
Ask yourself why you want to PROS'ECUTE, verb - "to follow or pursue with a view to reach" when living implies resisting outcome (dying)?
KING (sovereign) + QUEEN (consort of sovereign)...what if those represent enacting balance and reacting choice?
And yet the lives of us and them are being moved from inception towards death, no matter how many stone walls the masons of free will are putting up within the minds of the many.
Try to resist the temptation of suggested restrictions and question the ongoing, perceivable system underneath. The use suggestion to tempt the many to ignore the perceivable system and the more the perceivable is ignored; the less power (resistance) the perceiving have within.
Your consent to suggested moralism is what allows the few to shape "sin" within your head, which only then allows further suggestion of a scapegoat to shirk response-ability (choice) onto.
There's no such thing as forgiveness within a moving system...those within shape as responding choice, on the fly, the consequences of their choices.
The anticipation of outcomes is based on the many consenting to the suggested "progressivism" by the few. Life isn't outcome oriented (dying); but resistance to origin for sustenance of self (living).
Have you ever committed cold blooded murder? Turns out very few have; yet so many blame others for doing it. What about self destruction? Turns out many do; yet so few reflect upon self for doing it.
NATION; noun - "a people". Is there any nation that is controlled by its people instead of so called representatives? Isn't the biggest national violation the ignorance of being one of "a people"; hence already partially representing the whole nation?
CHANCE; noun - "the effect of an unknown cause"...how then could the perceiving ones exist within all perceivable as the effect of the cause?
Also; if the perceiving ones exist within everything perceivable...where does "nothing" comes from? Could it be a suggestion by others.
The so called "Crown Corporation" represents the corpus oration (whisper of the death) of the ornament (crown) aka the ORNA (from adorn - "to set off to advantage") MENT (from mens; mind; memory).
The state of nations within nations represent the suggestion of others within your consenting mind.
LONDON aka LONE (alone; solitary one) DONE (performed; expressed) represents "alone" ALL (perceiving) within ONE (perceivable) as form (life) expressed within flow (inception towards death).
Been there; done that. Digging into suggested information doesn't grow ones comprehension within perceivable inspiration; it buries it down the "rabbit-hole"; while spending resistance seeking information from others.
As for providing definitions...I try to take the provided (suggested) definitions apart; while try to express the predefined; perceivable inspiration this system communicates itself with. Nature doesn't provide one defined word; it offers predefined sound towards responding choice to resonance (need) or dissonance (want).
VATICAN; noun (Latin vates; seer) - "fore-teller" aka one who suggest that which isn't to tempt others to ignore resisting that which is. The temporary living within the ongoing process of dying can only foretell death.
Yawn yawn yawn. I don't need definitions here. I submitted something. I understand it. I am not sure you do when expressing all of that. But thanks for your efforts. They aren't wasted.
Although how they affect the country is quite hidden from it. But obviously has a larger role in it. On the outside they're another corporation, or HQ of corporations. But that is veiled in quite a secretive state. Laws, Mayor, Police Force, Security arrangements. What it means is quite the guess you're providing. I suggest watching some documentaries about it.
You're breaking down what I have causally implied, but I am laymen. I know of them watched some opinions controversial and pro. It means nothing more or less.
But I forwarded a comparative argument. Could the FED be held treasonous, in response to another claim. Hahaha. Only a lynch mob would disagree, and at that point what has happened?
Submission to information suggested to you; standing under (understanding) those suggesting it to you. Why use your choice to submit and stand under the suggesting choices of another's choice?
A suggested word cannot define anything; it can only tempt to ignore perceivable sound aka predefined input (perceivable) for redefining output (perceiving).
What I try to express is perceivable inspiration...not suggested information. I grow comprehension within perceivable; while resisting the temptation to understand (stand under) suggested.
The people around you cannot define reality for you; reality exists as perceivable before anyone within can make suggestions about it. The many ignore this; which allows the few to exploit ignorance.
This system moves and motion communicates inspiration to those within. Others suggest brands upon moving things to tempt them to ignore the motion. All suggested words represent brands upon perceivable sound. The few utilize suggested words (all languages) to invert the behavior of all those who ignore sound.
When we use words; we are tempted to view communication as agreement vs disagreement aka a conflict (reasoning). The moving system moves on, no matter if those within agree or disagree with it. Real communication represents adaptation to input aka resisting (living) temptation (dying); which isn't a conflict (want vs not want) but a response-ability (choice) within balance (need/want).
Resistance (living) is fertile (growth); Ignorance (dying) is futile (loss). Both (growth/loss) represent the internal power of energy. All effort; no waste.
What if it's the many who ignore that everything is open (perceivable inspiration); which allows the few to suggest information and then withhold it from the many who want it?
Suggestion represents the hidden hand for all those who ignore being the all (perceivable) seeing I (perceiving).
Furthermore; it's the few who constantly use sleight of hands; reveal of methods and notices of liability to the many; while simultaneously tempting them to consent to nondisclosure agreements. Why does that work? Because the many ignore perceivable for suggested. The perceivable inspiration doesn't require agreement to be perceivable; it requires response-ability (choice) for adaptation to it.
ONE represents the only part (role) within the whole ALL, and only within the whole (dying) can the partial (living) grow.
Corpus oration (whisper of the dead) represents of the outside (motion) communicating sound towards perception; which is being ignored for suggested words; which when consented to tempts one to ignore sustaining life by adaptation to perceivable sound, for babbling (utter words incoherently) while dying; hence uttering the whisper of the dead.
HEAD (perceiving input aka sensation) for responding choice within balance (need/want). That implies center within half/half. If one ignores this for wanting or not wanting the suggestions by others; then one puts oneself into a want vs not want conflict; while ignoring need. That represents quartering (imbalance) the half (balance).
Sleight of hand: GORDON (guardian aka resistance) FREEMAN (men with free will of choice) within HALFLIFE (balanced living).
Each of us represents the effect (perceiving) expressing the cause (perceivable). Implication (if/then) represents the tool of choice within a moving system to discern self; while growing comprehension, and through moving, the whole enacting system already broke itself down into each partial response (choice) within its momentum (balance).
It's suggested information that tempts one to stand under (understanding) others; hence feeling like not being an expert (layman). Meanwhile within ALL perceivable; each ONE represents the perceiving center (choice) for expression (need) or repression (want).
There's no but (exception) for perceiving within perceivable; only ignorance thereof for suggestions by others.
The way I write and the amount thereof represents expressing growth of comprehension by repeated adaptation (frequency of resistance) to perceivable inspiration. Everyone can choose to do that; but reading any of it as suggested information only tempts them to ignore perceivable inspiration; while watching ever increasing walls of text.
Look at squirrels living in a tree. They live in accordance with the momentum of the growing tree. They adapt to any circumstances perceived while life moves on. The more they do; the more they comprehend about the tree; which then allows them to run up and down; while chasing each other around the tree at high speed; while jumping gaps at ease.
Knowledge (perceivable inspiration); pro vs contra (reasoning about suggested information). Suggestion tempts to ignore perception.
To WATCH (forbearance of sleep aka restraint of passions) is being ignored when consenting to watch suggested information; because choosing want (information suggested) over need (inspiration perceived) represents falling for temptation (passion); hence lacking resistance (restraint).
Meaning is predefined within perceivable everything; which allows each perceiving one-thing to grow (more) within loss (less). Nothing represents the suggested inversion thereof.
Whenever the many suggest no; not; none; nothing; nothingness, they telegraph their ignorance of perceivable everything to the few. It's like a daily litmus test for ignorance. Notice also that almost every conflict of reason one engages in; tempts on to defend oneself against suggestion by saying "no; because....". That represents building ones defense upon the foundation of "nothing". Hilarious; yet ineffective.
FEDERAL (pledged; contracted) RESERVE (response to serve; slave) SYSTEM (assemblage of things adjusted into a regular whole).
a) a suggested system tempts one to ignore being the dissembled partial (living) within the whole (dying) perceivable system.
b) the contract represents choice (consent) to choice (suggestion) contract law aka ones submission to the choice of others.
c) those who consent to suggested are already guilty of ignoring natural law (balance to choice) for contract law (choice to choice). That's treason aka the overthrow of controlling (govern) ones own mind (ment) by standing under the suggestions of others; who can then define; redefine and contradict any suggested information at will.
The temporary living within the ongoing process of dying represent the response to a moving system; which cannot be claimed (obtained; held onto) by those within being moved by it.
You view all of this through the lens of the suggested laws of men aka a controlled environment that restricts your behavior; your free will of choice and thereby your means to grow comprehension of the perceivable (natural law) system. There's no way to overcome a controlled environment; when going into represents the ignorance of having free will of choice by consenting to the suggested environment that restricts choice.
The many are tempted to choose among the suggested choices of the few; while ignoring to represent free will of choice at the center of a balance based system. They are blindly trying to make choices within imbalance; while wondering why everything is fucked up. Others can make efforts to write all of this down for them; but others cannot make the choices for them.
Using the many to lynch the few doesn't heal the weakness within the many (ignorance) and there will be yet another few ready to exploit ignorance of perceivable with suggestions. On the other hand...resisting ignorance; while growing resistance to temptation; shrinks the potential of suggestion and without suggestion; the parasitic few loose the vector to tap the ignorance of the host many.
If the many would comprehend that being perceiving within perceivable represents evaluation within value; then the few couldn't suggest any substitute values anymore, and without consent to suggested values; the few couldn't define; redefine and contradict prices upon freely perceivable value.
Treason aka high treason implies overthrowing government; while the parasitic few are utilizing suggestion to undermine government, until the many consenting to them, are overthrowing their own government; hence being tempted to treason against themselves.
Why does all of this work? Because GOVERN (to control) MENT (mind; memory) implies as free will of choice within either perceivable (need) or under suggested (want). If one consents to a suggested government; then one ignores to control ones mind within perceivable by choice.