Obviously. The jews need their golem. It was Spain until Britain beat them. Then it was the US. When the dollar hyperinflates, they’ll move to China, where they’re already the only non-Han who enjoy Inner Party membership.
Get rid of the jews and the world’s only terrorists would be Muslims.
If you track the history of the world’s “reserve currency” and look into the geopolitical changes that happened at the transition points (and the persons who were the catalysts) as it flowed from one nation to another, it’s like opening the back of a watch to see how everything connects.
imho, innawoods with minimal possessions conveniences not made by one's own hand is about it. still have to be constantly mindful about not causing undue harm to others, though (again, imho; ymmv :)
What if life exists in-between FORWARDS GIVING (inception) and FORWARDS GETTING (death)...hence struggling within what it got, while resisting the temptation of what it gets?
a) MOR'AL, adjective [Latin moralis, moris, manner.] - "form; method; way of performing; custom"...flow (inception towards death) defines the morals of form (life)...unless ignored.
b) consenting to suggested moralism gives those suggesting the power of consent to define; redefine and contradict moral behavior.
In short...moral (perceivable) or immoral (suggested) aka need/want (balance) implies ones free will of choice in-between.
Suggested moralism...life in-between want vs not want (imbalance).
Example: struggling to resist appetite (want) for hunger (need) represents moral; reasoning over hamburger (want) vs cheeseburger (not want) represents immoral...switching sides to cheeseburger (want) vs hamburger (not want) doesn't make falling for the temptation of appetite moral.
Reason (immoral) or Implication (moral)...it's your choice.
Obviously. The jews need their golem. It was Spain until Britain beat them. Then it was the US. When the dollar hyperinflates, they’ll move to China, where they’re already the only non-Han who enjoy Inner Party membership.
Get rid of the jews and the world’s only terrorists would be Muslims.
You'd think the Chinese would have learned after the humiliations they suffered at the hands of the (((you-know-who)))-financed "British Empire".
I thought the Asians were supposed to have "long memories". Guess not in this case.
Fuck, you make it sound simple
If you track the history of the world’s “reserve currency” and look into the geopolitical changes that happened at the transition points (and the persons who were the catalysts) as it flowed from one nation to another, it’s like opening the back of a watch to see how everything connects.
Is there any way to live a moral life?
Sure. It requires sacrifices that most don’t want to make, though.
I'm curious
imho, innawoods with minimal
possessionsconveniences not made by one's own hand is about it. still have to be constantly mindful about not causing undue harm to others, though (again, imho; ymmv :)Love and forgiveness. Of self and others.
What if life exists in-between FORWARDS GIVING (inception) and FORWARDS GETTING (death)...hence struggling within what it got, while resisting the temptation of what it gets?
a) MOR'AL, adjective [Latin moralis, moris, manner.] - "form; method; way of performing; custom"...flow (inception towards death) defines the morals of form (life)...unless ignored.
b) consenting to suggested moralism gives those suggesting the power of consent to define; redefine and contradict moral behavior.
In short...moral (perceivable) or immoral (suggested) aka need/want (balance) implies ones free will of choice in-between.
Example: struggling to resist appetite (want) for hunger (need) represents moral; reasoning over hamburger (want) vs cheeseburger (not want) represents immoral...switching sides to cheeseburger (want) vs hamburger (not want) doesn't make falling for the temptation of appetite moral.
Reason (immoral) or Implication (moral)...it's your choice.
U.S. is the puppet. or, in this case, "golem" would be more accurate.