This is our national heritage. The Founding Fathers did the same thing breaking off from England and imposing the Constitution a decade later.

Power collapses when it can no longer expand.

“It is in the very nature of totalitarian regimes to demand unlimited power. Such power can only be secured if literally all men, without a single exception, are reliably dominated in every aspect of their life.”

“From this first characteristic of totalitarian terror—that it does not shrink but grows as the opposition is reduced—follow the next two key features. Terror that is directed against neither suspects nor enemies of the regime can turn only to absolutely innocent people who have done nothing wrong and in the literal sense of the word do not know why they are being arrested, sent to concentration camps, or liquidated. The second key factor follows from this, namely, that the graveyard peace that spreads over the land under pure tyranny as well as under the despotic rule of victorious revolutions, and during which the country can recover, is never granted to a country under totalitarian rule. There is no end to the terror, and it is a matter of principle with such regimes that there can be no peace. As totalitarian movements promise their adherents before they come to power, everything will remain in permanent flux.”–The Origin of Totalitarianism Hannah Arendt

Interesting. Thank you, Jon, for helping me make this connection. Your writings and lectures never fail to provide food for thought.

The issue is not reality versus fantasy (or construct). The issue is obtuse reasoning.

There are ever so few straight shooters in the public space. You are one of the few, but even you sometimes “skate around the edges” for effect. There’s a lot of evidence you ignore because it doesn’t satisfy “consensus” or “audience” view. Audience view, of course, has been preprogramed by “them”.

Here’s another TOPICAL excerpt from my soon-to-be-released on https://ozziethinker.wordpress.com “Prophesy, prediction and consensus view – preconditioning for spirited souls?”

“Of course there is a lot of establishment negativity generated towards conspiracy theories and the “horrors” of an open internet. Ironical official government theories and parallel conspiracies are often either largely true or outright lies. The real scandal, therefore, is in the wide reliance on breeds of obtuse reasoning. By example, Imagine you see before you a picture of some sort of idyllic scene beneath a bright blue sky, location unimportant. Out of view by several kilometres and completely omitted from the picture is a topology that would be described very differently. The slant image of my example comprises giant industrial chimney stacks continuously belching gaseous plumes that cause a build-up of filthy black smog which seems to permanently stain the clouds. All this is out-of-view, but, given a wider picture, conspiracies might focus on the negative in isolation “for effect”. Taking this into the political arena (which absolutely underscores the establishment heart) there are no or next to no dissenting voices prepared to vocalise beyond obtuse reasoning (i.e. such as choosing to ignore industrial waste, in my example) and that is where the major issue lies for governments of the world in general.

Significant changes to the original (2014) concept are noted with the additions “consensus view” and, I must say, rather ambiguous “spirited souls”. Consensus view somewhat echoes another archived “to be written” memo, contritely titled “Attitude”. One note and single line “a bad attitude is good” aptly reflects the intention behind my “consensus view” annotation, which, of course, clearly emphasises the power objective behind propagandas. There is a correlation I haven’t discussed yet. Consensus view directly impacts obtuse reasoning. In fact, so much so, it beckons the hard to confirm question; did obtuse reasoning pre-empt consensus view or was it the other way round? This is, I might add, a question even conspiracy theorists invariably fail to address. That is also one of the pivotal arguments I use against most so-called “alternative” views.

I note just about all views either respond to relative ignorance or superstition (deliberate or otherwise). Others champion different consensuses whose varied content boils down to the same equally acrid mulch that lend favour to official decorum. In addition to the syndrome, I have also noticed that if one “camp” says “yes”, the other instinctively emphatically responds “no”. Considering this “us” versus “them” dichotomy, it seems plausible to determine a sole basic planner scripting an “ongoing without end” mock good “that which is official” and evil “the antipathy towards anything official” contest. Doubtlessly the planner’s will (desire) would be (perhaps posthumously) advanced by pyramidal structures in precisely the same manner as (and possible extension of) the “good government” versus “evil anarchist” visceral war as has been expressed through the ages.

Discussions about spirit and soul can lead to equally emotive bipartisan debates. It seems that which isn’t solid, under terms of atheism, gives license to create bullshit. Though outpourings about the immaterial might generate “fashionable” truths on occasion, because everything in that domain is perceived to be unprovable, the nicest speaker may as well find an appreciative audience. In other words, for matters that transcend physicality, truth is superfluous. For example many believe the current pope “must” know something about God because he is head of the Catholic Church. In this context, whenever the pope makes a revelation about the paranormal (which includes the spiritual) it must be true to believers. Conversely, per identical obtuse reasoning, anything that contradicts, defies or invalidates the pope’s “truths” must be (the equivalent of) heresy. Conversely, the lone agent of prohibition blocking any pope’s charismatic attempts to “pioneer new domains” is tradition. Traditionalism acts as guide, juror and potential censor. To make matters worse, most religions customs and culture have become so bloated there is near zero opportunity for fundamental or symptomatic evolutionary change.”

Best
OT

https://randrewohge.wordpress.com/2018/01/17/john-galt-ayn-rand-mega-corporations-mega-government/

“I think you all know that I’ve always felt the nine most terrifying words in the English language are: ‘I’m from the Government, and I’m here to help.'” President Reagan

“The individual has always had to struggle to keep from being overwhelmed by the tribe. To be your own man is hard business. If you try it, you will be lonely often, and sometimes frightened. But no price is too high to pay for the privilege of owning yourself.” Rudyard Kipling (1865–1936)

In my simple song: Life Is A Game https://www.youtube.com /watch?v=KpSOtfnkFAs