Comments on: Freedom is the natural state of being https://blog.nomorefakenews.com/2017/05/06/freedom-natural-state-of-being/ NoMoreFakeNews.com Tue, 16 May 2017 04:11:14 +0000 hourly 1 https://wordpress.org/?v=5.2.10 By: Keanu Mattos-Nathaniel https://blog.nomorefakenews.com/2017/05/06/freedom-natural-state-of-being/#comment-31562 Tue, 16 May 2017 04:11:14 +0000 https://jonrappoport.wordpress.com/?p=18074#comment-31562 I find this to be a very interesting piece. I do seem interested in how it correlates with what I been consciously telling mySELF lately. I do coin the term ‘Individual Power’ and don’t take interest in most new age and other cults talking about ‘WE ARE ONE’ and shit like that. I stick to connecting only to Self and not some external force which could potentially be parasitic or leaving your thoughts/mind vulnerable to psychic entities behind the curtains.

Like Laura Leon said:
If one is connected to their True Source, through one’s inner kingdom, and not via external sources, then they will not seek to gravitate to anything parasitic with attaching hosting forces, designed to lead one astray.

]]>
By: bob klinck https://blog.nomorefakenews.com/2017/05/06/freedom-natural-state-of-being/#comment-31561 Wed, 10 May 2017 17:36:30 +0000 https://jonrappoport.wordpress.com/?p=18074#comment-31561 At a deep level, I would accept this definition. Incidentally, it exposes how utterly unfree we currently are, with interests and institutions striving day and night to keep our minds distracted by identity politics, trivial or blatantlly contrived misinformation, rah-rah collective emotional experiences (e.g., sports and their American extrapolation, war), largely redundant (especially as industrial robots proliferate) jobs that, were it not for the income they supply, the majority of people would rather not be doing, etc.

A more practical definition of freedom in daily life (per C.H. Douglas) is that it is the ability effectively to make discrete choices; i.e., to choose one thing at a time from among meaningful options.

]]>
By: Oliver Manuel https://blog.nomorefakenews.com/2017/05/06/freedom-natural-state-of-being/#comment-31560 Mon, 08 May 2017 14:39:14 +0000 https://jonrappoport.wordpress.com/?p=18074#comment-31560 Here is my admittedly crass, over-simplified, capitalistic analysis of the development of energy for humanity:

1. Alfred Nobel achieved great wealth and fame by developing and patenting a way to release chemical energy from tri-nitro-glycerine (dynamite) in 1867.

https://www.nobelprize.org/alfred_nobel/

2. Steady progress in development of even more powerful atomic/nuclear energy by Prout, Einstein, Rutherford, Aston and Chadwick in 1815-1932 was abruptly halted in 1935 when Chadwick accepted a Nobel Prize by reversing his 1932 endorsement of Rutherford’s 1920 suggestion “neutrons are compacted hydrogen atoms,” i.e., compacted proton-electron pairs.

https://dl.dropboxusercontent.com/u/10640850/Nuclear_Energy_Error7.pdf

3. After the release of energy from cores of uranium and plutonium atoms destroyed Hiroshima and Nagasaki on 6 Aug 1945 and 9 Aug 1945, nations and national academies of sciences were united on 24 Oct 1945 to hide the source of energy in atomic bombs, and

4. A Nobel Prize was awarded to Hideki Yukawa in 1949 for a false nuclear model that hid the 1935 error by Weizsacker and Chadwick.

https://www.nobelprize.org/nobel_prizes/physics/laureates/1949/yukawa-lecture.html

5. Thus human greed and selfishness isolated humanity from the most abundant and powerful source of energy provided by his Creator.

https://dl.dropboxusercontent.com/u/10640850/HIGHER-POWERZ.pdf

]]>
By: bdoyen https://blog.nomorefakenews.com/2017/05/06/freedom-natural-state-of-being/#comment-31559 Mon, 08 May 2017 05:22:00 +0000 https://jonrappoport.wordpress.com/?p=18074#comment-31559 JohnHenryHill, what an interesting comment. Hope you continue to post. I’m enjoying your website, now, too. Thanks.

]]>
By: Greg C. https://blog.nomorefakenews.com/2017/05/06/freedom-natural-state-of-being/#comment-31558 Sun, 07 May 2017 18:45:05 +0000 https://jonrappoport.wordpress.com/?p=18074#comment-31558 I have 1/8 Native American blood in me, so I always knew from an early age what freedom should be. Hated school, hated employment, started my own software company, and now teach music, and help counter the effects of schooling on developing minds. I agree, freedom does not come through voting – my mother once told me that in her small New England town, people were blacklisted in the local paper if they did not pay the poll tax. It was basically considered a subversive act not to vote, practically as bad as draft-dodging. The motto of the U.S. should have been, “Freedom isn’t free,” a ridiculous saying that is supposed to get you to surrender your “tiny” individual freedom to the self-determination and quasi-protection of the group.

]]>
By: Oliver K. Manuel https://blog.nomorefakenews.com/2017/05/06/freedom-natural-state-of-being/#comment-31557 Sun, 07 May 2017 12:24:12 +0000 https://jonrappoport.wordpress.com/?p=18074#comment-31557 Bob,

Is freedom our inherent, individual ability to develop our own understanding of reality, truth, God?

http://www.journalijar.com/article/16474/the–universe–is–in–good–hands./

]]>
By: bob klinck https://blog.nomorefakenews.com/2017/05/06/freedom-natural-state-of-being/#comment-31556 Sun, 07 May 2017 01:09:35 +0000 https://jonrappoport.wordpress.com/?p=18074#comment-31556 Surely what’s missing here is a clear definition of “freedom”. If the universe functions in accordance with inherent laws, then a notion of freedom that posits the ability to ignore them and do whatever we choose is simply delusional–a formula for guaranteed failure. The only freedom having meaning would be the ability to discover and conform to these laws in order to advance and enrich our lives. I think that voluntarism besting compulsion as a path to personal growth and satisfaction is one of these laws, but unfortunately genuine voluntarism is hard to cultivate within the hierarchy enforced by centralized finance that currently controls human affairs.

]]>
By: Oliver K. Manuel https://blog.nomorefakenews.com/2017/05/06/freedom-natural-state-of-being/#comment-31555 Sat, 06 May 2017 21:28:06 +0000 https://jonrappoport.wordpress.com/?p=18074#comment-31555 Jon, I admire your keen analytical mind and intellectual courage.

It is strangely quiet here this weekend because you are now recognized as a real threat to the UN’s tyrannical one-world government and US DOE’s – Departments of Education and Energy

As noted on a few other blogs, . . .

“This weekend, Jon Rappoport’s blog is the “coal miner’s canary” that will tell us if there is any hope for freedom under President Trump:

http://joannenova.com.au/2017/05/weekend-unthreaded-161/

]]>
By: Theodore https://blog.nomorefakenews.com/2017/05/06/freedom-natural-state-of-being/#comment-31554 Sat, 06 May 2017 17:37:55 +0000 https://jonrappoport.wordpress.com/?p=18074#comment-31554 Robert, see: https://jonrappoport.wordpress.com/2017/05/05/no-more-fake-news-site-temporarily-down-jons-blog-is-working/

]]>
By: JohnHenryHill https://blog.nomorefakenews.com/2017/05/06/freedom-natural-state-of-being/#comment-31553 Sat, 06 May 2017 17:08:47 +0000 https://jonrappoport.wordpress.com/?p=18074#comment-31553 Jon, I am not sure I agree with your primary premise: “Freedom is the natural state of being.”

Have you read “The Discourse of Voluntary Servitude” by Etienne De La Boetie (1552). He asks HOW and WHY the masses of people would ever allow themselves to become subjects of a “controlling power” (a few “elite” members).

I expanded on La Boetie’s thesis in my own essay titled, :How to Defeat Tyranny: Active Disobedience” available on my LAW BLOG: http://JohnHenryHill.Wordpress.com

From a physician’s point of view, humans are born and remain extremely dependent (and thus subject to outside “authorities”) until ages 11 and then 18, especially on their parents. From 18 years onward, humans (whether by socialization, orders from authorities, etc.) tend to place themselves in situations in which they are still subject to a “higher authority”: in college; university; employment (their job).

At least this situation appears to be true in Western and most Far-Eastern societies. Indeed, in the West, people who leave employment in a company and go out on their own (e.g., forming their own business; company) are given special names, such as “maverick”, “entrepreneur”, etc.

The ONLY society THAT I KNOW OF in which individual freedom was nurtured and continued throughout their lives were the American Indians prior to the 1870’s. (There may be other such societies; thus my emphasis on “THAT I KNOW OF”.)

The Sioux or Lakota Indians were raised almost exclusively by the females (NOT just a child’s mother, but all the women in their band). However, the boys and often girls were free to go off and play whenever they wanted. A parent (or other member of their band) might issue a boy “orders: – in reality more like a “suggestion”):: “go home to eat”, but the final decision was the boy’s. And his decision was respected – he would never be punished unless an instruction to him had life-threatening qualities to SOMEONE ELSE in his band – NOT to him.

From late boyhood (13 yo) he could wander off as he pleased; and by the age of 15-16 he was expected to do so! By age 13 NO ONE could order another man what to do! Ever!

Contrary to popular opinion, there were NO “chiefs” in a band or tribe. There was usually a “council of elders” with one man in the role of “moderator” (often the “medicine man” or an elderly man with great experience on THAT TOPIC BEING DISCUSSED. But there was NO chief who could issue orders to anyone; same for the “council of elders” – they could give opinions only.

When an issue involved the entire band or tribe, then every adult member (over 13) had a vote in that decision. If Brave X wanted to go on a raid, he could try to enlist others to go with him. The possible volunteers might listen to the consensus of the Council, but the decision of EACH brave whether to go or not was HIS decision alone. A good example is the Lakota Sioux called “Crazy Horse”. He declined all invitations to join the Council or accept any position of “authority”. Other braves followed him because he WON. He was very intelligent, planned in great detail; was very disciplined in battle (unlike the typical Lakota Indian,where each man fought his OWN battle once things got going). He refused to speak of his triumphs (unlike his peers); was willing to listen to any tactical battle advice; gave credit to others re: battles; and devoted himself to the poorest members of his band/tribe, even if it meant going without for himself.

During the first great “Peace Conference” at Fort Laramie U.S. officials expected the “chiefs” with some advisors of all the great tribes to show up – perhaps 50-100 Indians. When between 12,000 – 15,000 Indians showed up, they learned in a dramatic way that EVERY person in the tribe was a CHIEF. No Indian man had ANY authority over another man; No Indian man could sign any agreement binding another man,

John-Henry Hill, M.D., Ph.D.
LAW BLOG: http://JohnHenryHill.Wordpress.com
[…]

]]>