Tag: politics

On Conscious Liberation: Postulating Liberty as a Universal Concept

It is a false assumption that Liberty is merely a political concept. True Liberty is a universal concept. To embrace Liberty, ones inherent freedoms as a human being, is to embrace liberation from that which constrains you. This concept can be applied beyond the physical political sphere, to the mind and soul as well.

Thus the truest form of Liberty is conscious liberation. Breaking free from the dogmatic systems keeping us bound to archaic ways of being that exist as a self-fulfilling prophecy of our own enslavement, and holding us back from our true potential.

These systems constitute what can be referred to as “the Matrix” — the Web of lies, falsehoods, and arbitrary constructs that keep us ensnared in this trap. Breaking The Matrix, thus aiding in ones conscious liberation, means identifying the beliefs and behaviors that perpetuate human suffering and hinder our next evolutionary step through enabling these toxic cycles, and exiting them.

Some of these falsehoods and constructs are easier to identify than others. Such as the false left vs right paradigm, and similar narratives perpetuated for divide-and-conquer agendas. In truth there is no left versus right, white versus black, religious versus atheist, man versus woman, or you versus me, etc.

These ideas dividing people on the basis of political leaning, nationality, race, religion, or gender are all constructs creating a false dichotomy; labels designed to keep us separated from one another, manufacturing an opposition that isn’t really there to serve as a distraction for those in positions of power who benefit from distortion, and division.

The only true “enemy” if such a term is even truly applicable are predators who abuse and exploit the innocent.

Recognizing these aforementioned constructs are easy enough when one finally realizes the role that discord and disorder plays in maintaining a perpetual state of organized chaos; such as permanent war, the constant erosion of civil liberties, etcetera.

But some of these constructs are more subtle, harder to identify, and even more difficult to break because of how they have been deeply ingrained in human civilization and the collective consciousness of the masses. Organized in such a way that many cannot fathom the concept of existing outside of them.

Statism is at the forefront of these archaic ideals.

Keep reading

Ukraine Bans Main Opposition Party, Seizes All Its Assets

Ukrainian authorities have banned the country’s main opposition party and seized all its assets, once again undermining the narrative that President Zelensky is presiding over a beacon of democracy.

The country’s Ministry of Justice announced the move via Facebook, revealing that the Opposition Platform — For Life had been shut down and its assets, money and property transferred to the state.

The party had previously had its operations suspended in March after it was accused of being complicit with Russia and being “anti-Ukrainian.”

The ban means that Zelensky’s main political opposition has been eliminated. The OPPL was the second largest party in the country and its popularity surpassed that of Zelensky’s Servant of the People party last year.

Its leader Viktor Medvedchuk, who claims he is merely looking out for the interests of the Ukrainian people by seeking better relations with Russia, was placed under house arrest last month.

The announcement said the party was suspected of acting to “undermine the sovereignty” of Ukraine, with authorities have already banned 10 other political opposition parties for the same reason.

Last month, President Zelensky signed a bill into law that gave the green light to ban any party that challenged the government’s policy on the Russian invasion, empowering courts to seize assets without the right to appeal.

While opposition parties are being obliterated, Ukrainians who engage in dissent are also being rounded up and arrested by armed men from the Ukraine Security Service.

Keep reading

SOCIETY OF SPECTACLE

The Select Committee to Investigate the January 6th Attack on the U.S. Capitol, whose first of six televised hearings began last Thursday, is spectacle replacing politics. There is nothing substantially new in the accusations. The committee lacks prosecutorial power. No charges have been filed by Attorney General Merrick Garland against former President Donald Trump and none are expected. The choreographed hearings, like the two impeachment trials of Trump, will have no effect on Trump voters, other than to make them feel persecuted, especially with more than 860 people already charged (including 306 guilty pleas) for their role in storming the Capitol. The committee echoes back to Trump opponents what they already believe. It is designed to present inaction as action and substitute role-playing for politics. It perpetuates, as Guy Debord writes, our “empire of modern passivity.”

The committee, which most Republicans boycotted, hired James Goldston, a documentary producer and former president of ABC News, to turn the hearings into engaging television with slick packaging and an array of pithy sound bites. The result is, and was meant to be, politics as reality television, a media diversion that will change nothing in the dismal American landscape. What should have been a serious bipartisan inquiry into an array of constitutional violations by the Trump administration has been turned into a prime-time campaign commercial for a Democratic Party running on fumes. The epistemology of television is complete. So is its artifice.

The two established wings of the oligarchy, the old Republican Party represented by politicians such as Liz Cheney, one of two Republicans on the committee, and the Bush family, are now united with the Democratic Party elite into one ruling political entity. The ruling parties were already in lock step for decades on the major issues, including: war, trade deals, austerity, the militarization of police, prisons, government surveillance and assaults on civil liberties. They worked in tandem to pervert and destroy democratic institutions on behalf of the rich and corporations. They desperately work together now to stave off the revolt by enraged and betrayed white working men and women who support Donald Trump and the far right.

Keep reading

The Demented – and Selective – Game of Instantly Blaming Political Opponents For Mass Shootings

It is virtually impossible to find any ideology on any part of the political spectrum that has not spawned senseless violence and mass murder by adherents. “The suspected killer of Dutch maverick politician Pim Fortuyn had environmentalist propaganda and ammunition at his home,” reported CBS News about the assassin, Volkert van der Graaf. Van der Graaf was a passionate animal rights and environmental activist who admitted “he killed the controversial right-wing leader because he considered him a danger to society.” Van der Graaf was particularly angry about what he believed was Fortuyn’s anti-Muslim rhetoric. As a result, “some supporters of Fortuyn had blamed Green party leader Paul Rosenmoeller for “demonizing Fortuyn before he was gunned down in May just before general elections.” In other words, simply because the Green Party leader was highly critical of Fortuyn’s ideology, some opportunistic Dutch politicians sought absurdly to blame him for Fortuyn’s murder by Van der Graaf. Sound familiar?

During the BLM and Antifa protests and riots of 2020, an Antifa supporter, Michael Reinoehl, was the leading suspect in the murder of a Trump supporter, Aaron J. Danielson, as he rode in a truck (Reinoehl himself was then killed by federal agents before being arrested in what appeared to be a deliberate extra-judicial execution, though an investigation cleared them of wrongdoing, as typically happens when federal agents are involved). In 2016, The New York Times reported that “the heavily armed sniper who gunned down police officers in downtown Dallas, leaving five of them dead, specifically set out to kill as many white officers as he could, officials said Friday.” The Paper of Record noted that many believed that anti-police protests would eventually lead to violent attacks on police officers: it “was the kind of retaliatory violence that people have feared through two years of protests around the country against deaths in police custody.”

Then there are the murders carried out in the name of various religions. For the last three decades at least, debates have been raging about what level of responsibility, if any, should be assigned to radical Muslim preachers or Muslim politicians when individuals carry out atrocities and murders in the name of Islam. Liberals insist — correctly, in my view — that it is irresponsible and unfair to blame non-violent Muslims who preach radical versions of religious or political Islam for those who carry out violence in the name of those doctrines. Similar debates are heard with regard to Jewish extremists, such as the Israeli-American doctor Baruch Goldstein who “opened fire in the Cave of the Patriarchs in Hebron, killing 29 Muslim worshippers.” Many insist that the radical anti-Muslim speech of Israeli extremists is to blame, while others deny that there is any such thing as “Jewish terrorism” and that all blames lies solely with the individual who decided to resort to violence.

Keep reading