“Terror is needed in order to make the world consistent and keep it that way; to dominate human beings to the point where they lose, with their spontaneity, the specifically human unpredictability of thought and action.”

“Loneliness, as the concomitant of homelessness and uprootedness, is, humanly speaking, the very disease of our time. To be sure, you may still see people–but they get to be fewer and fewer–who cling to each other as if in midair, without the help of established channels of communication provided by a commonly inhabited world, in order to escape together the curse of becoming inhuman in a society where everybody seems to be superfluous and is so perceived
by their fellow-men. But what do these acrobatic performances prove against the despair growing all around us, which we ignore whenever we merely denounce or call people who fall for totalitarian propaganda stupid or wicked or ill informed? These people are nothing of the sort.
They have only escaped the despair of loneliness by becoming addicted to the vices of solitude.”
Hannah Arendt The Nature of Totalitarianism

We see this rapidly accelerating with the attempts of Google/F-Book/Twitter and more to delete even the most innocuous of Truths. It scares the hell out of them. They’re caught and they know it. They fear a purge of the like we are witnessing in Saudi Arabia and Hollywood and soon D.C. and Langley. It’s headed their way and it was sovereign individuals who outed them and will continue to do so. A collective is incapable of doing so.

Off topic Jon but I’d sure like to know what Bill Ayers and his lovely wife Bernadine Dohrn have been up to for the last 10 years. I’m sure up to no good and I’d assume they are behind much of this current chaos albeit quietly with Giorgio Schwartz funding much of their shenanigans. I am well aware of the goals of SDS and later Weather Underground.

Excellent comments by the way. Jesus Christ also focused on The Individual and they hated him for that, among many other things.

If I may recommend a video—–Norman Dodd interview and “Foundations”–G. Edward Griffen conducts the interview.
https://www.youtube.com /watch?v=c5eHdTk5hjw

The latest models of men, merit themselves on how much testosterone is running through them, and if there is not enough for their liking, well then. Toys are important things to the survivalist modern male and prescription drugs…I think the term in the end is arrested development.

Synthetic body with big tires and the mind of a child; sees himself through the wonder of his narcissism and many mirrors. And the real world, becomes a fear Oz.

Video games and action heroes sculpt the male psyche. Bread and circus immerses him in delusions of grandeur and aggrandizing. Spirit has abandoned him, and he is a soulless piece of plastic. He believes in nothing but own nihilism. He can not seek his individuality, for there is no one to show him how to do it.

A severe lack of mirror neurons has permanently damaged his abilities; his empathy is replaced with apathy and disclosed it and love; amongst other difficult emotions as a weakness to be feared.

A promiscuous and under dressed female population has taught him to seek the physical only, she does not ask that he be a man, for even she can not define it; and any sign of commitment is a signal for both, to run and duck for cover.

The initiatory are gone, Ozzie from Australia, they have been quieted, broken or assassinated;the breeding line has been retarded; great men at one time stood in the White House and other bastions of political power. Now, we have reality TV actors/mafia frontmen, who buckle under the pressure of office and wring their small hands and suck their thumbs and fucking Tweet stupidity all day. Allowing the puppet masters well-greased hand to reach right up their ass and control their very movement. Fear of assassination has stilled the voice that was never sincere anyway; a man must be willing to sacrifice himself for truth. With initiators like that, the call of manhood is war, war, war now…

And we must remember now Oz, constant war really isn’t war is it, therefor “War is peace”.

Real men are not listened too, for they ask that you stand up as an individual, regardless of the weather of oppression and actually do the right thing. They ask you to develop your own thoughts and critically think, they ask that you develop your own imaginative solutions to your own problems, and when you gain them, have the fucking courage to stand alone with them, and if your wrong…have the courage to admit it that…but then I’m just babbling. Oh..did I just smell french perfume. 

“There are a number of strange features of traditional Malundi society. Strange to western thought at least. If I ask you ‘Who you are you?’ You will say ’I am Matt.’ You see yourself as an individual, autonomous and independent of the general mass of humanity.
If I ask an Arab, he will say ‘ I am Hassan, son of Jaffar, son of Ali’, he sees himself as a continuation of a line from father to son all the way back to Abraham, and many or most Arabs can recite their lineage to Abraham. If I ask a Scot, he will say ‘I am Angus McConnor of the clan McConnor’, his membership of a clan being important to him. If I ask a traditional Burmese person, they will say their name is ‘Suu’ or ‘Aung’ the practise of having family names, 1,000 years old in Europe, has only very recently been introduced in Burma.
When you ask a Malundi ‘Who are you?’ he will respond ‘Lundi’.
If you ask ‘What do people call you?’ and he may say ‘Msifo’, but that is what he is called, not who he is.
It is as if an Englishman was asked ‘Who are you?’ responding, ‘English’. You would say, ‘No, not what are you, who are you?’ Msifo doesn’t understand what you are getting at. Who he is, is Ulundi, the name Msifo is merely a means of getting his attention and could be changed a number of times throughout his life. No more important than clicking your fingers or clapping your hands to get his attention.
Traditionally we see our society as the westerners view Bees or Ants. You do not think of opening a beehive and asking a bee what is his name. For all we know, every bee in the hive may consider themselves autonomous independent individuals, or like Malundians, consider their identity as part of a greater whole. For us, it is the Lundi nation. The bees do not consider themselves part of the hive, they are the hive, for us we are not a part of the nation, we are not a member of the nation, someone within the nation, each individual ‘is’ the nation. If you see a hundred thousand Finches swooping and rolling over the plain, do you think of each having individual consciousness, and if so, how on earth can they miss each other and instantaneously all turn left when only inches apart. A shoal of two million Sardines, only millimetres apart and yet never seemingly touching or bumping each other. That is how Malundians see themselves. ”

Saddam’s Sister
PJ Lang
Smashwords

This difference is very basic and the cause of great misunderstanding.
As a European it is very strange NOT to think of myself as an individual, nor do I ever want to.
Realise that the last thing a farmer wants is autonomous sheep or chickens, each following their own independent destiny. Ruins the profit.

What is spoken here is the purest sense of that word; individual.

A single organism capable of independent existence. Distinguished by special; singular and/or markedly personal and extremely important characteristics; exhibiting unique or unusual qualities.

A single human being, as absolutely distinguished from a group.

Separate and distinct from others of the same kind. Having similarity to another only in the physical realm. And as distinct as this whole Universe in mind, and spirit and soul and especially, imagination.

Individuality is the state or quality of being an individual; particularly of being a person separate from all other persons and possessing his or her; and lets not get confused here there ‘are’ only two kinds.

This unique individual has his/her own needs or goals, rights and responsibilities. The exact definition of an individual is of extreme importance within the fields of biology, law, and philosophy, to say the least.

An individual is a sovereign entity, who possesses an inalienable right to his or her own life, a right derived from his or her nature as a rational being. Individualism and Objectivism.

Individual rights are not subject or parley to a public vote; not that the individual is an enemy of the state or a government. But free to think, feel, love and thrive outside of it.

Since only an individual man or woman can possess rights, and that is absolute; the expression “individual rights” is a redundancy really, as they are not given, earned through privilege, but are a birth right.

Collective rights is a contradiction in terms actually, as the rights of an individual are always superlative to any such notion.

The principle of  individual rights is rightly the only moral base of all groups; in reality, it is an unbreakable law of nature and the Universe.

“Here Marx is more relevant who stresses on the free development of an individual as the ultimate goal which can be possible only in a society in which all people own all things together and direct all processes together in amity and unity, etc.”   -MS

This is fallacious, illogical, and I am sensing purposely misrepresentative of Marx, you are seeking to deceive; or, are you totally ignorant of his deception? Karl Marx cared little of the individual, let alone individual rights, unless they were his. I would suggest you re-read his manifesto. It’s about totalitarianism. It’s about globalism, saturated in Zionism.

Marx is a fine student of Engels and Hegelianism; influenced by the eugenics of Darwin and his ilk; the Zionist and globalist Moses Hess; Spinoza; and the king killer Robespierre.

Karl Marx an atheist, more religious than neutral in that faith, who was born and raised a jew, His paternal grandfather was a Dutch rabbi, and so he was contaminated from the beginning with that erudite understanding of the world, and in his being one of the chosen people.

Sickly and in poor health his whole life, he was plagued by the diseases that such a faith can bring. Turning inside his real faith, in ‘the wretchedness of existence”.  In a reconstruction of the details of his physical disorders, his illnesses and unwell life. Marx more than likely suffered from hidradenitis suppurativa, as stated and researched by Professor Sam Shuster.
Dermatologist, Professor Sam Shuster of Newcastle University, in 2007 made a re-diagnosis of Marx affliction, and through thorough examination, of his communications and books, letters. Concluded, that Marx did not suffer from liver problems, as is commonly stated from academia and the socialist following.

Shuster states…

“[…] hidradenitis suppurativa, a recurring infective condition arising from blockage of apocrine ducts opening into hair follicles.”

A painful and aggravating, miserable condition. Professor Shuster goes on to state that…

“The illness [ hidradenitis suppurativa] emphasised certain traits in his character. He argued cuttingly, his biting satire did not shrink at insults, and his expressions could be rude and cruel. Though in general Marx had a blind faith in his closest friends, nevertheless he himself complained that he was sometimes too mistrustful and unjust even to them. His verdicts, not only about enemies but even about friends, were sometimes so harsh that even less sensitive people would take offence… There must have been few whom he did not criticize like this… not even Engels was an exception.”

And Engels on more than one occasion called him a ‘Dictator’.

“Shuster went on to consider the potential psychosocial effects of the disease, noting that the skin is an organ of communication and that hidradenitis suppurativa produces much psychological distress, including loathing and disgust and depression of self-image, mood and well-being, feelings for which Shuster found “much evidence” in the Marx correspondence. Professor Shuster went on to ask himself whether the mental effects of the disease affected Marx’s work and even helped him to develop his theory of alienation.”

In the end Mallikarjuna, Marx hatred of private property was not based on some altruist notion of equality for all, but in the wretchedness of his own life and the desperate poverty and physical suffering that he and his family experienced in Paris. Without Engels, he would not have survived it, and we would not be talking now.

Physical illness plagued him for the rest of his life. He hated society and he hated himself.

The most [sorely overlooked and] important quote is:

““They [conformists] think society wiser than their soul, and know not that one soul, and their soul, is wiser than the whole world…Society everywhere is in conspiracy against the manhood of every one of its members….Whoso would be a man, must be a nonconformist…. Nothing is at last sacred but the integrity of your own mind.” Ralph Waldo Emerson”

NOTHING has changed. Indeed “conditions” have quite probably eroded further. Does modern day society know what a “MAN” is?

Best
OT

Imagine that for a second. A face has eyebrows, eyes, a nose, a mouth, lips, chin, cheek bone. etc.. Still, every one of these faces is different. Amazing is it not, that with so few components, trillion of new faces are created,

Same thing for voices. You can recognize somebody just by their voices.
Is it not fascinating?

It is also the same for animals, flowers and even snowflakes and drops of water.

I conclude that life loves individuality, We were born as distinct individuals, and we should remain individuals

So why are some people trying to pretend that individuals do not exist or that it has no power?