We Don't Get Sick

Photo by Chris Linder, Seattle, Washington, USA

The nearest hospital is a weeks travel away, so it is a good job that the Evenki people of Siberia, don't get sick.
They live very simply, their lively hood, as well as most day to day necessities like food and clothing, come from the reindeer herds. What are we doing wrong?

We in the so called "developed west", only have to look at a snow flake before we are laid up in bed with flu, yet these folks live at temperatures of minus 30, in makeshift homes heated by wood fires, for months on end.

So what are we doing wrong?

Well, we are eating stuff that looks like food but isn't. Maybe it was once, but after pesticides, chemical fertiliser, irradiation, sterilisation, colouring, flavour enhancers, stabilisers, and lots of other chemical additives and preservatives, any similarity to real food, only exists in the imagination of the poor soul who is about to eat it.
It makes you ill, feeble in body and mind, and should not be allowed near living things, never mind packaged at great cost to the environment and sold to us as, "Extra Special", "The Best", "Finest", or whatever branding is misapplied to the over processed slop.

Of course, this stuff should be banned by the government food agencies, but it isn't because the companies that make it, pay the wages of politicians. Oh you thought they worked for you? Sorry to break it to ya like this. They don't.

We live in cities steeped in pollution from vehicles and factories. We breath toxic gas every time we get into the car or go far a walk. And then there is the barrage of radio signals, stuff we can't see all around us, from your mobile phone to wireless connectivity, its all harmless of course, they've done extensive tests. Well who really knows what the long term effects are, of exposure to these waves? Don't mistake the arrogance of test labs for competence. I mean, would you trust these guys with your life? Neither do I.

For some reason, we smother ourselves in harmful chemicals in daily ablutions which involve shampoo, conditioner (which is only necessary because the shampoo has damaged your hair) Moisturiser, deodorant, cleanser, toner, hair spray, gel, make up, fake tan, and botox, and that's just for the guys!
It's all chemical, they shouldn't be massaged into your scalp, face, skin, armpits or anywhere near you for that matter.
Rather, they should have stayed in the lab that they were created in. Why do we think we need to look like some Hollywood divas anyway? We don't!

Then there is our lifestyle.
Machines do all the hard work now, so all we need to do is press buttons. That's great until you find that you don't have the energy to climb the stairs without pausing for a rest halfway.
The trouble is that everyone is so busy pressing buttons, that there is little time left to take care of life's essential tasks so we end up buying slop from the supermarket and because we are so unhealthy, we cake ourselves in chemicals so that we feel at least a little bit glamorous.

Who am I to complain. It's progress. Only it's not. It's dystopia in the guise of progress.
And the cheek of the Trans-humanists to try and suggest that this path will lead to some kind of techno nirvana. You're kidding me, right?

I fancy being a reindeer herder, but grazing might be a problem around here.

Can We Fix It? (Yes We Can)

It is encouraging to see that others are prepared to write truthfully about what is happening in the world. James has a style which makes even the worst outlook, palatable. He knows more than he is letting on, Im sure.

It is important to be a part of the solution, rather than a part of the problem that James and others highlight.
Exactly how we are to do this, is debated. One thing that is for sure is that unless we first become acquainted with the details, we may as well be "out to lunch" along with almost everyone else.
To many, the solution, is a form of gnostic, enlightenment. Even the Church has erred into contemplative spirituality, post liberalism, dominionism and a range of other aberrant theology.

In the comments here, Don QS has raised the point that, "there seems to be a pathological aversion to admitting uncertainty". This is healthy. The science world has too many arrogant types.
It is not enough for me. If there is a chance that truth exists, then we are obliged to find out what it is.

I believe that it does exist. OK its down to belief again, but that is a part of our make up as human beings. We don't go out in the car unless we believe that the brakes will stop us safely. We are all believers, its just that we believe in different things.
And then, if we do arrive at the truth, what if it is unpopular, even illegal to declare it to others in society? What if  speaking the truth, meant that you were viewed as posing a threat to those who refuse to open their eyes to witness the modernist impasse, the enemy of society rather than it's liberator.

Given the severity of the struggle, it is understandable that many people are happy to reject the concept that they have a role in this.
So it remains the responibility of those who recognise thier duty to be part of the solution.

"Late adopters" are welcome but dont leave it too late.

A Confused Work Ethic

There are very few instances where the route to personal success, is doing as little as possible, so I am trying to teach my son (9) the value of hard work.
The tidying of the bedroom scenario is one where I hope he can get the message.
It will not get done by sitting and looking at the mess. No matter how many times he says, "Ill tidy it in a bit", unless he translates the thoughts into action, it will never happen.
It is not as easy as you may think, to illustrate the benefits of the "Protestant Work Ethic" There is little supporting evidence to suggest that hard work equates to success.
Firstly, we have the sub working class who get along (nicely in some cases), by NOT working, then we have the opposite side of the spectrum, those who have succeeded by the merits of others.
I am thinking mainly of those who have inherited wealth and live a very comfortable lifestyle but do not appear to have actually done anything to earn it, unless you consider having a sense of duty to those less fortunate, as a job.

This led me to consider the role in society, of those who have inherited wealth (and therefore influence) when compared with your average hardworking bloke.

I do have great respect for those types who have built their lives on the basis of hard work and common decency especially when you contrast them with others who I do not respect. They seem only to be able to duck and dive, yet to the whole world, have the trappings of success.

I cannot help thinking about the way tribal societies are organised. The chief was once the fiercest warrior in his younger days. He was the strongest, best climber of trees, and most skillful hunter. This is pretty much how I would expect Darwinism to work in real life. The fittest would survive and pro-create. Those who wield power in this mixed up western society, would be the least likely to survive in the world of natural selection.

When you look at it this way, it could be argued that the greatest attribute, many of our current ruling elite possess, is pliability. I don't mind that as long as folks are straight about it. It's when weakness and lack of moral standing are paraded as integrity and honesty, that I get miffed.

No wonder we find it a battle to raise our kids properly with so many wrong messages and mixed up signals.

Could Thatcher's Funeral Cause Riots?

Who would have thought the death of Margaret Thatcher would polarise opinion to the extent it has?

 

During a mini riot in Brixton last night, some "enterprising" individual, managed to change the display on the "Ritzy".

Spontaneous parties erupted across the country as news of the death of, "Pariah", Thatcher spread. Some photographs show images of Thatcher being burned, Middle Eastern style.

 

Meanwhile, there were calls for her statue to be erected in Trafalgar Square alongside the other great British Heroes.

 

I cannot remember seeing so much joy being poured out due to the death of an English person.

This means that she was hated more than we ever realised, or society has declined to the point where respect for the dead is no longer considered appropriate by many.

The first is evident. I fear the second maybe applicable too.

 

If this is the reaction following news of Margaret Thatchers death, what on earth is going to happen if they decide to hold a "Diana" style funeral service?

 

Should the government take note here? Yes, undoubtedly. There is a powder keg of dissatisfaction waiting to be ignited and the smallest spark, such as the perception of undue honour being bestowed upon "The Pariah" Thatcher, could blow the whole gaff up, seriously.

 

These are strange and dangerous times.

Financial Cannibalism

Ty Andross writes about "Something for nothing societies", where we become unwilling, or unable, to produce more than we consume.

"Unwilling to support themselves, they set off to consume those that do, to feed on and support themselves. The takers of wealth eat the  makers of wealth, Cannibalism of the worst sort"

He goes on to say:

Once they have achieved voting majorities, the economies they inhabit, are much like a farmer's field. They eat everything down to the roots and next years seed corn. Nothing is left to create future wealth and total destruction of production of wealth is the result. "Something for Nothing" societies are a  product of a number of factors which combine to destroy the lives and future prospects of the majority of its citizens. Creating desperate mobs of citizens easily manipulated by fear. It drives the final descent into economic and societal collapse.

I have been reading similar things.

James Delingpole wrote much the same recently. Historian and conspiracy theorist, WebsterTarpley calls it "Internal Looting", describing it as the natural progression of aggressive expansion.
In this case, western capitalism has reached its geo-political boundaries of China and Russia. With nowhere left to loot, the elites turn inward, devouring the very source of future production.

Adam Smith's Invisible Hand

Economist, Adam Smith's "Invisible hand of God" wasn't just invisible, it was never there in the first place.
As famous quotations go, it is as appropriate as, "Just like That" or ,"Now you see it, now you don't",  sayings which could easily sum up the sentiments of those who's wealth "disappeared", as if by magic at the sleight hands of Smith's Laissez Faire economic theory.

Smith did espouse altruism but it appears to have been discarded in the rush to own everything in the world.
Some reports, like this one, which suggests that those who died in the Irish potato famine, were a result of the British government's strict adherence to Laissez faire policy, rather than crop failure which was widespread throughout Europe at the time, do not convey any sense of compassion whatsoever.

I'm not knocking free enterprise but rather, the absence of responsibility whereby the less fortunate, suffer as a consequence of commerce. It is a lack of personal accountability that is the problem.
The irony is that those who benefit most from free market economics are also the most tax efficient, leaving the burden of taxation, squarely on the shoulders of the working class.

Socialism is an evil, made necessary by the greed of unscrupulous merchants, many of whom, would in any other walk of life be possibly regarded as sociopaths.

The existence of these two systems of government side by side, has created a false dichotomy, a dialectic through which "Big Business" has been able to strengthen and consolidate it's position in  government and society.

Bedroom Tax in Chaos?

According to saturday's Mirror, the Bedroom Tax is in trouble.

A judge had ordered that two severely disabled children should not have to sleep in the same room. The same is true if one of the children requires through the night care. It might transpire that many families with disabled children may be eligible for FULL housing benefit and council tax benefit, including the repayment of any arrears.
Families with children who may fall into this category, will have to present their case to the local authority, who at this point in time, have no idea of how to make the assessments needed.

This system, which has cost millions to implement, is showing signs of being unworkable.

The new Universal Tax Credit system is the same. It may prove an expensive mistake, in that the cost of implementation, including social costs, may exceed the savings made.

The system appears to be "Hamstrung" by political correctness. It all comes down to who is deemed to have the greater right.
In the case of the Bedroom Tax. The disabled children were considered to have more rights to a decent nights sleep, than the government's rights to deprive them of benefit.

Every one has rights, some more than others, but what of the right to be right? As Phillip E Johnson points out, that's when we hear the grand, Sez who?"

Ovenden Facing Justice, Whatever That Is

 

The naked child photographer, who poses as an artist, Graham Ovenden is in court accused of child sex offences.
According to one article this morning, Ovenden has been accused before, but has somehow managed to beat the charges.

How much influence do you need, to beat the rap? And what type of influence? I suspect I know.

Considering the general outlook for society, it's not looking very good, and there are no heroes to save us.

We are on our own. And with such degenerate rabble as we have, supposedly leading the country, we're better off that way.

Anyway pressure brings out the hero in some people.

Unilever, And The Stain That No Soap Can Remove

The "Lever brothers" soap manufacturing company was started in 1885 by William and James Lever Using a process invented by early business partner, William Watson, whereby glycerin was mixed with vegetable oil such as palm oil, rather than tallow, to create a free lathering soap.

This early product became known as "Sunlight soap", and soon after, the brands, "Lifebouy", "Lux", and "Vim" were also established.

By 1888, "Sunlight soap" production was around 450 tonnes per week and the company moved to new premises on the Wirral peninsular in Merseyside, England. The plant was named, "Port Sunlight", and expanded to include a "model village", to accommodate the company's staff, in good quality housing with high architectural standards and many community facilities.

Lever Brothers was one of the first companies to take an interest in the welfare of its workers and the masonic influences of founder, William, (who was initiated into the craft in 1902), were to be applied, not just in the workplace, but also in the village, where conformity to certain strict standards, and participation in community life, was to be expected.

William was to become the founder of several Lodges during his lifetime, especially as, growing business forced many of his workers to migrate to London and participation in their "mother" lodge, became impractical.

William Lever eventually became 1st Viscount Leverhulme and is remembered as a great philanthropist.

Four years after he died in 1925, Lever Brothers Ltd, (which was already the biggest company in Britain), merged with Dutch margarine producer, "Margarine Unie" to form "Unilever", one of the first ever multinational corporations. Unilever today,  is the world's third-largest consumer goods company, owning more than 400 brands. (the most famous of which are, Aviance, Axe/Lynx, Ben & Jerry's, Dove, Flora/Becel, Heartbrand, Hellmann's, Knorr, Lipton, Lux/Radox, Omo/Surf, Rexona/Sure, Sunsilk, Toni & Guy, TRESemmé, VO5 and Wish-Bone)

Around the same time as the founding of the Lever brothers company, Welsh explorer Henry Stanley, (The one who allegedly uttered the famous phrase, "Dr Livingstone I presume", after finally discovering the Scottish missionary and explorer, David Livingstone in Tanzania), had helped King Leopold II, of Belgium stake the claim of his organisation, "The International Association for the Exploration and Civilization of Central Africa", in the Lower Congo.

Leopold II's stated intention was to bring "civilisation" to the Congo basin but his motivation was really, exploitation of rubber and ivory. Belgian colonial rule, was to become, and remains, one of the most brutal regimes in Africa, with its use of "Travail Force" (forced labour). Villages were wiped out, the land was expropriated and the communal society was destroyed. Workers were mutilated if they failed to gather their quota of rubber from the wild vines; women were tortured, murdered, raped, and driven into brothels for King Leopold's native soldiers or his white agents. It is estimated that the population had declined by six million in 1912.

Stanley was appalled, even though, it was estimated that he had been directly responsible for the death of 6 to 7 hundred natives. One of his critics, Richard Burton, (not the actor) declared, 'Stanley shoots Negroes as if they were monkeys". 

Partners in the Belgian expropriation of land, were some of the richest capitalists in the world at  the time, Guggenheim, J.P. Morgan, J.D. Rockerfeller (Jr),  Thomas Fortune Ryan, Aldrich, and of course, William Lever.
A typical deal would be similar to one offered to  Ryan's and Daniel Guggenheim's "American Congo Company", whereby they would be granted  a ninety-nine-year option to collect rubber "and other vegetable products", over 4,000 square miles, plus a ten-year option to buy 2,000 square miles of territory.
Similar concessions were given for rights to mining, and forestry, including the palm oil needed for the production of Lever Brothers soap.

Despite William Lever's good standing at home, he was not only aware of the conditions in the Congo, but relied upon "Travail Force", and helped to establish it. The history of Unilever is irreversibly stained by this vile system and no amount of soap can ever remove it.

Delingpole's Despair

I posted this snippet of an article up on FB last week and apart from a comment from Bill, it has been largely ignored so I thought I would post it here to be ignored as well.
The author is James Delingpole. James is well known for his Telegraph Blog in which he openly shares his views on climate change.

Here is his impassioned, frustrated, and despairing piece:

"I'll tell you what I fear. I think we have now reached that stage of last-days-of-the-Roman-Empire intellectual and moral depravity where almost no one in our dominant corporate/political/financier/lawyer class believes it's worthwhile or even possible to do the right thing any more. Some of them may be vaguely aware that, yes, the only way the world is ever going to recover from the economic mess we're in is through a radical agenda of cost-cutting, contraction of the state, sound money, and lower taxes. But they've made up their minds that none of this is a vote winner in our heavily socialised Western economies and that therefore the only hope is simply to grab what you can while you still can – and forget any fancy, idealistic notions you may have had about making the world a better place."

The reason I have returned to this article is because it has been resonating with me so strongly over the last few weeks. Every time I read a commentary or news item reporting on the dreadful state of affairs we find ourselves in, I mentally refer back to the piece. Not only that, but James' thesis can be expanded further, although sadly, the conclusion is still pretty miserable.

Time for some more pictures of kittens.