Author Archives: danijel

Positive language

Posted on by
Reply

I’m watching this:

… and I’m thinking, the Americans are always “leading”, they are “making progress”, and they are never having problems, they are having “challenges”, which is what one does if he’s in a dominant position; there are things challenging his dominance and “leadership”.

They never fail, they never lose, they never fuck up. There are no negative things out there, just “challenges” that will be “overcome” as “progress” is made in the course of their “leadership”.

What an incredibly arrogant and stupid people they are.

How does one know whether he’s been making progress or not before the war is actually over and one can retrospect? Why do you say problems are “challenges”, as if they are communicating personally with you? Is the fact that you will die if you jump off a tall building a “challenge”, or is it better to say it’s a limitation you need to work with? If it’s a challenge, it means you need to overcome it, but that’s a very dangerous position to have in politics; for instance, you can see a powerful sovereign country like Russia or China as a challenge, which will lead you into a mutually destructive conflict, or you can see it simply as a state of things – you have interests and goals, others do as well, and now you need to negotiate with them, haggle, make deals, cooperate in mutually beneficial ways. If others having any power is a “challenge”, what does that mean, that you have to work on making everybody else into a powerless slave before you’re happy, and you’ll see every instance of freedom, sovereignty and independence of others as a threat, a “challenge”, until you are universally seen as such a menace to others, they will join forces against you and destroy you like a mad dog that you are?

I knew a person who always stated he’s making progress, every day; always positive stuff going on, always learning new lessons, and some other bullshit. An unbiased bystander would see him and conclude he’s completely deluded, because his situation was stagnant at best and degrading desperately at worst, and there wasn’t a single positive thing about it whatsoever, and that was mostly because of his insistence that everything negative is actually positive. Sometimes progress is possible only after you admit you have failed – you did everything wrong, you deluded yourself and you are now facing a disaster, and it’s not that all the bad things necessarily happen for the best, they can happen because you’re a damn fool who made all the wrong calls, persisted on a wrong path and is now facing utter ruin in all respects. That’s the point where you can possibly save yourself if you repent, if you admit failure, and concede defeat, so that you can learn what you did wrong, and do better. If you claim you’re winning and making progress while you’re on a path towards your ruin, and you provoke other powers in their back yard, claiming you’re “challenging their excessive claims” and “answering their challenges”, all this “positivity” will increase the chances of your country becoming a glass parking lot.

America is an incredible country – founded on the principles of arrogance and Satanism, but thinking they are God’s chosen people for some reason. Even their most common variety of Christianity is based on shallow and selective thinking, and incredible self-serving arrogance.

Whom to believe?

Posted on by
19

Last night I was thinking about why reputation destruction attempts are so rampant online, and why all political sides try to discredit the opponent instead of his arguments, and on the other hand some people act as if all arguments are on the order of “Rome is in Italy” where the person making the statement doesn’t matter. Of course the person making the statement matters; if you’re reading investment advice, Warren Buffet’s opinion is going to carry much more weight than the opinion of some random person on Reddit. That’s why it would be a problem if we had to read all opinions completely unsigned, divorced from the “brand” of the author, and then I thought – the weight we give to the information we read is a product of the weight of the argument itself, and the perceived weight of the person/entity making the argument.

You are going to take something much more seriously if it comes from a reputable source. Also, if a formerly reputable source abuses the trust invested in them by all the previously sound information they have been giving, and starts spreading propaganda, their “brand weight” is going to degrade and people aren’t going to put much trust in their opinions anymore. We saw that already with the news networks, which have degraded to the point where they are the least trustworthy sources out there, but also with corporations like Boeing, and, unfortunately, science – which has been corrupted so terribly by financial influences, policies that favor publishing questionable work often over publishing solid work infrequently, political influences and so on. Basically, I went from a position of treating scientific articles and publications as mostly rock solid in 1980s and 1990s, to a position where I now see them as obfuscated garbage until proven otherwise. This is unfortunate, because I already treated everything the governments are saying as deception until proven otherwise, I treated “news” as propaganda, lies and deception until proven otherwise, and I can also add science as something that’s manufactured on demand by industry and politics, and has no scientific value until proven otherwise. Essentially, my weighing of various “brands” has changed from positive to zero or negative, which leaves me with a very realistic conundrum: whom are we to believe, and are we actually better off with all those sources of (dis)information around, than we would be if it all stopped bombarding us with worthless, deceptive bullshit altogether? Basically, if Internet went down permanently, would that really be a bad thing? At least the liars would have their mouths shut finally, and deluded people would have to depart from their insane echo chambers, if not voluntarily, then because their Borg interconnection hardware stopped working, and Big Brother TV stopped broadcasting.

The painful thought that follows this is, whether people who got liberated from the brainwashing machine would actually bother to turn their brains on, or is it really their aversion to independent thought that created the addiction to the brainwashing machine in the first place? It’s not that people believe that Earth is flat in the 21st century due to lack of evidence; they believe in lies because truth doesn’t make them feel special and important enough. They believe in lies because they prefer it that way.

Ariadne’s thread

Posted on by
1

I just wrote something to someone privately and I think it’s too broadly useful to be kept in the dark, so I’m reposting it here:

What came to my mind as the answer to your question is St. Augustine’s view on this.

God is Eternity, beyond space and time, but this Eternity is also present in space and time as Ariadne’s thread in the labyrinth, and is also an attractor that pulls us towards itself, if we allow it. If we follow the Ariadne’s thread, it shapes our lives in the shape of Eternity, so that we can leave space and time behind and never look back. But there is also the opposite force – worldly attachment, pride, habit and vice, that tries to make us into the shape of the world; all the weakness is of the world and for the world, and all the true strength makes us in the shape of God, where we become Eternity in space, on the path of time.

So this is my answer to your question. Hold on to all the pieces and aspects of Eternity in space and time, and you yourself will become an aspect of Eternity in space and time, and the shape your existence takes on that path will be appropriate for your salvation.

Surrender to God is not letting go, it’s the brilliance of mind that allows you to see, understand and act of God.

Dead man’s switch

Posted on by
Reply

I’ve been watching this video:

The first thing that crosses my mind is that Americans can’t seem to stop personalizing politics, which is incredibly weird in their own situation, since it’s obvious that the hidden men behind the curtain actually run the system, and the men on the stage are merely puppets; the similarity between foreign policies of Bush Sr., Clinton, Bush Jr., Obama and Trump are such, that if you ignored the media circus (Republicans evil, senile and stupid, Democrats nice, charming geniuses) and only watched the actual events and actions, you couldn’t see a difference in government to save your life. So, the assumption that one senile man caused all this, and the system is fine otherwise, is as deluded as the Democrats blaming all kinds of Obama policies on Trump. No; one man, especially the senile dotard Biden, can’t decide or do anything on his own over there. Their system is designed to inhibit people who want to go rogue; we saw that in the Trump administration, where the president was completely blocked from making any decisions other than those pre-approved for him. American presidents are lame ducks by design. No, it’s not Biden the Senile who made this mess; everything was designed and planned by the same men behind the curtain who hindered Trump. Call it deep state, call it the intelligence community, I don’t care, but don’t tell me that the president runs America because you’ll make me laugh so hard I’ll snort my coffee all over my keyboard, which is going to be unfortunate because I just got a new one and I really like it.

The second thing that I found remarkable is that Shapiro cites facts that make it blatantly obvious that America designed the entire system of armament and logistics of the Afghan army to be completely dependent on America, to the point where they literally can’t use anything without a constant, continuous American line of support, in a very literal sense where they would need to have American mechanics and other specialists constantly maintaining the helicopters and other aircrafts or the stuff won’t work. It’s a dead man’s switch – if a dependent country goes “rogue”, basically if it tries to have an independent policy in any way or form, or tries to change allies, their entire military becomes inoperative after a very short period of time, intentionally designed into the equipment by introducing short maintenance cycles, replacement parts that are made only in America and are probably difficult, impossible or uneconomical to produce locally, and I’m not even talking about likely software issues, where things would need manufacturer approved diagnostic/service tools to be plugged into the hardware in order to make it work after it presumably shut down “to protect itself” after the expiration of an intentionally short duty cycle. Essentially, if you’re an American ally and you can’t produce your own weapons, absolutely count on the fact that the weapons you bought from America, and for good money, will stop working instantly if you decide to go against American “interests” in any way. Basically, buy American, be a slave; because that’s what the “freedom” they so loudly advertise actually means. It means compliance with American wishes, or your world ends. Or they just leave when it’s no longer in their interest to stay, and your world ends.

 

A plebiscite on America

Posted on by
1

I was watching this video just now:

Then I thought about this:

Traditionally, nations have waged war by mustering armies, defeating their enemies in battle, and despoiling their lands and cities. Only after total victory is the process of remaking a society feasible.
But America in Afghanistan sought a shortcut, and by ‘shortcut’ Cockburn means ‘something that takes ten times as long but doesn’t look as nasty for TV cameras’. America hoped that with enough half-baked social engineering in the half of Afghanistan it controlled, it would eventually be rewarded with victory, and Afghanistan would become the Holland of the Hindu Kush. On Ivy League campuses, students are taught to decry ‘colonialism’, but the Ivy League diplomats who sought to remake Afghanistan in Harvard’s image were among the most ambitious practitioners of it in world history.

So, alongside the billions for bombs went hundreds of millions for gender studies in Afghanistan. According to US government reports, $787 million was spent on gender programs in Afghanistan, but that substantially understates the actual total, since gender goals were folded into practically every undertaking America made in the country.

A recent report from the Special Inspector General for Afghanistan Reconstruction (SIGAR) broke down the difficulties of the project. For starters, in both Dari and Pastho there are no words for ‘gender’. That makes sense, since the distinction between ‘sex’ and ‘gender’ was only invented by a sexually-abusive child psychiatrist in the 1960s, but evidently Americans were caught off-guard. Things didn’t improve from there. Under the US’s guidance, Afghanistan’s 2004 constitution set a 27 percent quota for women in the lower house — higher than the actual figure in America! A strategy that sometimes required having women represent provinces they had never actually been to. Remarkably, this experiment in ‘democracy’ created a government few were willing to fight for, let alone die for.

The initiatives piled up one after another. Do-gooders established a ‘National Masculinity Alliance’, so a few hundred Afghan men could talk about their ‘gender roles’ and ‘examine male attitudes that are harmful to women’.

 

And then I thought: yes, it makes sense. The Afghans compared the two evils – the Taliban, who subjugate women and implement Sharia, and the Americans, who don’t believe in God, introduce insane ideas that contradict all common sense and the way people want to live, emotionally and socially castrate men, forcefully infest all institutions with incompetent women (incompetent because that’s what you get with gender quotas), and turn everything into a mockery of nature and a lunatic asylum. So, when the Americans withdrew, it was a plebiscite on America when people basically stood down and let the Taliban take over, because nothing can be worse than America. That’s not because they are backward savages. If Hitler by some miracle rose from the dead now, at least 70% of Europe would greet him as a savior and beg him to deliver us from the American evil. That’s what we think about America and the insane mental garbage it’s exporting into the world. They are worse than the Taliban, because at least the Taliban have some principles they adhere to. America doesn’t even believe in itself, let alone something greater. So, you will ask, why are then all those people hanging on to American planes, desperately struggling to go to America? It’s obvious: because they are human garbage who left their wives, sisters, mothers and daughters to be sex slaves to the Taliban, and they are trying to get some of American money they got used to during the occupation. That’s the profile of people America is able to attract at this point. Human garbage loves them, and the rest would rather have Hitler or the Taliban, than their idiocy that denigrates and mocks millennia of our civilization.

Don’t get me wrong, I wouldn’t like the Taliban any more than I like the Americans, but I think the white people created everything that’s good in this civilization and most of what is good in the world in general, I don’t think there should be gender or race quotas, I think diversity is an unworthy goal and meritocracy is the only relevant criterion: give everybody access, and those who succeed at something deserved it because they are better. Yes, I believe some people are better than others, that’s called discrimination and it’s a good thing, in fact discrimination is the best thing, and we used to believe that when our civilization was truly our civilization and we had the right to be proud of ourselves. That was when men held doors open for women, when women and men respected each other, and everybody knew what female and male roles are. For us here in Europe, voting “no” to American bullshit wouldn’t mean getting the Taliban to run our countries, it would mean getting the insane garbage with green hair the fuck out, and learning how to act like ladies and gentlemen, where people actually talked to each other instead of swiping right on Tinder.

And of course, all the insane leftist garbage – overweight, genderqueer, and with hair painted in violent, poisonous colours of warning, along with all the politicians and “journalists” on CIA and Soros payroll  – would hang from American cargo planes taking off from Europe, too, and good fucking riddance as far as I’m concerned.