John Galt's rant, the gigantic psychological projection, continues,
know that we know nothing,’ they chatter, blanking out the fact
that they are claiming knowledge-
not that they claim to know nothing, it's that they claim to be
directly responsible. They being the
are not absolutes,’ they chatter, blanking out the fact that they
are uttering an absolute-
is what the elites have championed since the time of Immanuel Kant.
Anyone that provides the basis for their escape from the results of
their irresponsible acts, like Fukushima or the Gulf of Mexico, etc.
etc. is often financed by them. We discard as irrelevant whether any
statement of any kind is anything absolute or not. That's a red
cannot prove that you exist or that you’re conscious,’ they
chatter, blanking out the fact that proof presupposes existence,
consciousness and a complex chain of knowledge: the existence of
something to know, of a consciousness able to know it, and of a
knowledge that has learned to distinguish between such concepts as
the proved and the unproved.
they're still trying to get out of anything their greedy schemes and
subversive tactics have caused. “Limited liability,” remember?
a savage who has not learned to speak declares that existence must be
proved, he is asking you to prove it by means of non-existence-when
he declares that your consciousness must be proved, he is asking you
to prove it by means of unconsciousness-he is asking you to step into
a void outside of existence and consciousness to give him proof of
both-he is asking you to become a zero gaining knowledge about a
sure what relevance this has except as a philosophical prop to Rand's
attack on the wrong people, us, whom she calls savages. This is what
the members of Skull & Bones call non-members too. Just saying.
he declares that an axiom is a matter of arbitrary choice and he
doesn’t choose to accept the axiom that he exists, he blanks out
the fact that he has accepted it by uttering that sentence, that the
only way to reject it is to shut one’s mouth, expound no theories
this certainly sounds like philosopher-speak for “sit down and shut
up” to me.
axiom is a statement that identifies the base of knowledge and of any
further statement pertaining to that knowledge, a statement
necessarily contained in all others, whether any particular speaker
chooses to identify it or not. An axiom is a proposition that defeats
its opponents by the fact that they have to accept it and use it in
the process of any attempt to deny it.
for Rand, no matter how clever at phiosophising she was, if her
axioms are inaccurate or incorrect from the outset, any elaborations
on them will not serve her case against any and all people but the
elites, whom she believes have rights over the rest of us and would
literally stop the world to get their way if they had to. That was
the message of Atlas Shrugged. I would very much like that
thought to sink in too. With all the technology at their disposal,
assuming people would actually be stupid and criminal enough to
follow their orders, the elites have long had the power to alter or
destroy the earth, so that their plans to make over the world to
their liking would become reality. This is the level of criminal
insanity that really exists at or near the top. Obviously it must be
exposed so that more people are aware of it.
the caveman who does not choose to accept the axiom of identity, try
to present his theory without using the concept of identity or any
concept derived from it-let the anthropoid who does not choose to
accept the existence of nouns, try to devise a language without
nouns, adjectives or verbs-let the witch-doctor who does not choose
to accept the validity of sensory perception, try to prove it without
using the data he obtained by sensory perception-let the head-hunter
who does not choose to accept the validity of logic, try to prove it
without using logic-let the pigmy who proclaims that a skyscraper
needs no foundation after it reaches its fiftieth story, yank the
base from under his building, not yours-let the cannibal who snarls
that the freedom of man’s mind was needed to create an industrial
civilization, but is not needed to maintain it, be given an arrowhead
and bearskin, not a university chair of economics.
are the real cavemen,
cannibals? Who are those who sit in a
university chair of economics but those who accept usury,
fractional reserve banking, finance models relying on compound
interest, central bank issuance of all money as debt to them for
doing nothing? What right do these people honestly have to dare
attempt to run a productive economy they themselves never contribute
to? This was nothing but a grandiose and odious set of projections
away from themselves.
you think they are taking you back to dark ages?
indeed, we do!
are taking you back to darker ages than any your history has
Their goal is not the era of pre-science, but the era of
pre-language. Their purpose is to deprive you of the concept on which
man’s mind, his life and his culture depend: the concept of an
objective reality. Identify the development of a human
consciousness-and you will know the purpose of their creed.
this remarkable paragraph around and who does it describe?
savage is a being who has not grasped that A is A and that reality is
those who suppose they are not themselves the savages of this world
have not grasped that A = A+whatever % of A is not reality.
has arrested his mind at the level of a baby’s, at the state when a
consciousness acquires its initial sensory perception and has not
learned to distinguish solid objects. It is to a baby that the world
appears as a blur of motion, without things that move-and the birth
of his mind is the day when he grasps that the streak that keeps
flickering past him is his mother and the whirl beyond her is a
curtain, that the two are solid entities and neither can turn into
the other, that they are what they are, that they exist. The day when
he grasps that matter has no volition is the day when he grasps that
he has-and this is his birth as a human being.
know that many of these people really DO act like babies, or rather
spoiled rotten little brats. The day when these babies realize that
those who they depend on for their food and everything else they pay
their minions for, have decided to leave their service, they may face
reality. But most just dive back into their money (as F. Scott
Fitzgerald and many others discovered) and remain babies, because
that's so much easier than having to admit that without their money
and the power over others that it represents, they are ... nothing!
day when he grasps that the reflection he sees in a mirror is not a
delusion, that it is real, but it is not himself, that the mirage he
sees in a desert is not a delusion, that the air and the light rays
that cause it are real, but it is not a city, it is a city’s
reflection-the day when he grasps that he is not a passive recipient
of the sensations of any given moment, that his senses do not provide
him with automatic knowledge in separate snatches independent of
context, but only with the material of knowledge, which his mind must
learn to integrate-the day when he grasps that his senses cannot
deceive him, that physical objects cannot act without causes, that
his organs of perception are physical and have no volition, no power
to invent or to distort, that the evidence they give him is an
absolute, but his mind must learn to understand it, his mind must
discover the nature, the causes, the full context of his sensory
material, his mind must identify the things that he perceives-that is
the day of his birth as a thinker and scientist.
but I doubt this happens to many among the elite, because they don't
have to, whereas, contrary to everything implied in Galt's / Rand's
rant, those of us who have the natural abilities to do so, have
usually, until fairly recently, dared to do things, to bring into
existence from their minds things of great usefulness to us, such as
computers, the internet, alternative media, so we can communicate
among ourselves across the entire planet, etc. These things are not
usually even properly understood by most who are rich.
are the men who reach that day
are the men who choose to reach it partly
do as best we can under the circumstances.
savage is a man who never does.
don't expect many who are rich and always have been to ever wake up.
Most are nothing but savage babies and I can't think of a worse
combination of character traits with which to entrust anything
important, especially money. More projections, assuming that she
knows anything first hand about primitive people, which she didn't
and this is also a widespread prejudice among the rich,
a savage, the world is a place of unintelligible miracles where
anything is possible to inanimate matter and nothing is possible to
the rich, anything they desire is possible if you just throw enough
money at it, including much that defies natural law, or has
unexpected and dangerous consequences.
world is not the unknown, but that irrational horror: the unknowable.
does an enraged baby feel if and when his desires are thwarted? Give
that enraged child the years it takes to reach maturity and plenty of
money and what would you naturally expect?
believes that physical objects are endowed with a mysterious
volition, moved by causeless, unpredictable whims, while he is a
helpless pawn at the mercy of forces beyond his control.
rich people complain that they are held back by their “stupid”
servants, whose only faults are that they have been taken in by
anything from feeling sorry for their employers, to hoping for more
grants of money from them, instead of recognizing that they are
working a dead end job and that they can be discarded as easily as
... a used wad of tissue paper.
believes that nature is ruled by demons who possess an omnipotent
power and that reality is their fluid plaything, where they can turn
his bowl of meal into a snake and his wife into a beetle at any
moment, where the A he has never discovered can be any non-A they
choose, where the only knowledge he possesses is that he must not
attempt to know.
last phrase is particularly revealing; yes, their knowledge is very
limited and they prefer it that way, so they really never have to
think for themselves and step out of line with the rest of their
kind. If some accredited somebody says something that gets into
print through an “authorized” media source, it is regarded as
important or factual when in most cases, critical analysis reveals it
to be claptrap! Most who are at or near the top are perpetually
misinformed as a result.
can count on nothing, he can only wish, and he spends his life on
wishing, on begging his demons to grant him his wishes by the
arbitrary power of their will, giving them credit when they do,
taking the blame when they don’t, offering them sacrifices in token
of his gratitude and sacrifices in token of his guilt, crawling on
his belly in fear and worship of sun and moon and wind and rain and
of any thug who announces himself as their spokesman, provided his
words are unintelligible and his mask sufficiently frightening-he
wishes, begs and crawls, and dies, leaving you, as a record of his
view of existence, the distorted monstrosities of his idols,
part-man, part-animal, part-spider, the embodiments of the world of
attempt here is clearly to posit any but themselves as wish makers,
followers of demons, worshippers of the natural elements, and
particularly their support for any thug who
announces himself as their spokesman, provided his words are
unintelligible and his mask sufficiently frightening. Well
what have we been treated to over the past twenty to thirty years?
They wish most people in this world would just go off somewhere and
die quietly and never bother them, they DO follow demons, some of
their own making, the latest attempt at creating an earth based
religion is a very apt example of their worship of the elements,
which they would like to pass to us as a universal religion for the
dawning New Age. All the New Age crap you know of was hatched and
funded by the rich. The poor are too poor to bother with such
nonsense that doesn't directly help them and the rest of us are too
busy just trying to make a living. By the way, the law of identity
has some other peculiar features; A is not A if it has different
attributes, presumptions based on faked data, do not stand as proved,
etc. You cannot ever hope to get the recognition for your efforts
just by being rich. Everyone with half a brain knows this, but very
few of those who are really rich do.
is the intellectual state of your modern teachers and his is the
world to which they want to bring you.
by teachers we mean the false kind, fake
gurus, New Age mystics, or equally “fake” scientists who have
sold out their integrity to New World Order gambits that play roles
in who gets promoted, or who gets fired, etc. The world they intend
for the vast majority of humanity is DEATH; no world at all. They
hope, miserable hope that it is, that someone with a stupid set of
priorities will just take orders from them long enough and supply
them with food and drink until their criminal plans are realized.
Galt / Rand are on a roll,
you wonder by what means they propose to do it, walk into any college
classroom and you will hear your professors teaching your children
that man can be certain of nothing, that his consciousness has no
validity whatever, that he can learn no facts and no laws of
existence, that he’s incapable of knowing an objective reality.
usually called relativity by some and used and misused to support
anything, so this is accurate. Those arguing from existence,
identity, as certainties are clearly in the minority just about
everywhere and it does not get any better the higher you do. It gets
then, is his standard of knowledge and truth? Whatever others
believe, is their answer.
is the so called “peer review process.” Academic people often
become quite hot headed when I bring this up and they perhaps assume
I'm stupid enough to believe that how Rand characterizes the process
isn't exactly what it really is. If you do independent scientific
research and it never gets peer reviewed to see what other
“scientists” may think about it, you'll never get anywhere,
because knowledge is power and they use this peer review process and
other phony accreditation games to keep it to themselves. It has
nothing whatever to do with the truth of anything and largely
disrespects truth, intelligence, honesty, integrity, the works, since
no one can know anything for sure about anything ... except to watch
out for anyone who jeopardizes corporate profits, because they are
often as not involved in these scam ventures themselves!
is no knowledge, they teach, there’s only faith: your belief that
you exist is an act of faith, no more valid than another’s faith in
his right to kill you; the axioms of science are an act of faith, no
more valid than a mystic’s faith in revelations; the belief that
electric light can be produced by ‘a generator is an act of faith,
no more valid than the belief that it can be produced by a rabbit’s
foot kissed under a stepladder on the first of the moon-truth is
whatever people want it to be, and people are everyone except
science to the elites, since the late 18th century anyway,
is their new religion, which means they have faith in it as long as
it provides them with the means to stay in power, etc. and to the
elites, everyone but themselves are lacking their special exceptions.[In prior ages they accorded the same status to alchemists. Believe me, dress it up all you want, these people still practice frauds.]
slight digression: Lately we have heard the pejorative phrase
“American exceptionalism.” This is a way of saying that America
and Americans supposedly believe themselves capable of doing what
other empires in the past have tried and failed to do; to bring the
world under a “peaceful” order (can you believe the sheer
audacity of this?) run for and by the elites. The American people
are sold on the idea that they are something special when they
aren't, just like other false teachers and thuggish leaders tried the
same on other people in the past, in Germany, Russia, Britain,
elsewhere in order to get their poor and other masses of their people
to go to war against this or that supposed adversary.
is whatever people choose to say it is, there are no objective facts,
there are only people’s arbitrary wishes-a man who seeks knowledge
in a laboratory by means of test tubes and logic is an old-fashioned,
superstitious fool; a true scientist is a man who goes around taking
public polls-and if it weren’t for the selfish greed of the
manufacturers of steel girders, who have a vested interest in
obstructing the progress of science, you would learn that New York
City does not exist, because a poll of the entire population of the
world would tell you by a landslide majority that their beliefs
forbid its existence.
the early 19th century people did not believe in
meteorites because accredited scientists refused to accept the
possibility that rocks were out in space and could crash into the
earth. In 1903 the authorities actually told people to stay away
from the Wright Brothers flight at Kitty Hawk because of course
everyone knew that manned flight was impossible. Nowadays science
tells people that genetically modified food is no different from
naturally occurring food as well as many other monstrous lies.
medical practice, supported by big pharmaceutical corporations and
supernational governments like the UN and EU, prevents any and all
comers from legitimate alternative medical treatments, many that have
been around for a long time, because everyone knows that these people
are discredited kooks. Really? They are constantly after the
natural supplements makers because they have no way to patent these
things and profit thereby. [Pay attention, Laurence!] That is also part of their wonderful
worldwide agenda; Codex Alimentarius. They do not care about health,
they care only about profit; corporate profit not whether some
alternative practitioner can make a living and help people gain
they matter and you don't. In fact if they had it their way right
now, we'd all be their slaves and if they didn't like something we
did or said, they would send us away to die or even kill us. Wait,
didn't the US Congress just give the President such powers? These
things express their true feelings and intentions. How are you
feeling about the globalists, billionaires, elites, super rich, etc.
right now? Feeling any better about them? Surely they have your
best interests in mind, and oh my, they care so much more about the
earth than you do, so you should just stop complaining and
thoughtlessly obey them, after all they have more money and power
than you do, which means as the song said, “when you're rich, they
think you really know.”
centuries, the mystics of spirit have proclaimed that faith is
superior to reason, but have not dared deny the existence of reason.
much of the Middle Ages, there were enclaves where reason was
practised covertly and it managed to survive. But reason is not just
a philosophical concept, it is something people use every day of
their lives. The proof of this lies in the number of correct
decisions at any time outnumbering the incorrect decisions. If this
were not the case, the world would instantly dissolve into chaos. It
is not governments exerting FORCE or the threat of FORCE that
prevents chaos, it is each human being's use of reason that does.
Let that point sink in.
heirs and products, the mystics of muscle, have completed their job
and achieved their dream: they proclaim that everything is faith, and
call it a revolt against believing.
posits that the collectivists, who she doesn't even know were set up
and financed by the same people that financed her work, are the heirs
of the princely and churchly powers that held sway for centuries
before the arrival of collectivism on the human scene. She says that
these collectivists, the new social philosophers proclaim
that everything is faith, and call it [faith or collectivism] a
revolt against believing [in the old mysticism and bourgeois
morality]. If we've read Rand correctly here, she is saying
that the materialist mystics (collectivists), were trying to say
their new faith was a revolt against the old faith, when they are
connected; one and the same. The connection is through money and
revolt against unproved assertions, they proclaim that nothing can be
proved; as revolt against supernatural knowledge, they proclaim that
no knowledge is possible; as-revolt against the enemies of science,
they proclaim that science is superstition; as revolt against the
enslavement of the mind, they proclaim that there is no mind.
but much of this is actually unnecessary and beside the point. The
elites have an agenda, to get everyone as far as possible to accept
their authority and to purposely set things up so that the average
person has no ability to reject them or their programmes. This as we
have seen lies at the heart of the “No child left behind”
programme. They will use the same techniques, developed as a war
tactic during the 1950's by the way, to make sure that most people
toe the line, etc. People do not know any better, because they
aren't supposed to know any better.
earlier epochs, the advantage the elites had over most people (except
primitive peoples who couldn't communicate with them very well and
had good reasons not to trust them) was that most common people were
trained by their religious beliefs to be kind, to care, to want to do
no harm, to try and find solutions that would benefit everyone, etc.
Not the elites. They have never been kind accept to bind, never
cared except for themselves, always sought to harm others, and find
solutions that would suit their own selfish desires, no matter what
the natural consequences. History is littered with tragedies that
resulted from this basic difference in outlooks. I'm far less
sanguine about their ability to carry out their plans despite their
technical capabilities than they succeeded in doing in for example
the 1930's, when most people were kind, caring and reasonable. The
reason is that we have been here before and many have awakened to
this reality, so it will not “go down” as it did back then.
you surrender your power to perceive, if you accept the switch of
your standard from the objective to the collective and wait for
mankind to tell you what to think, you will find another switch
taking place before the eyes you have renounced: you will find that
your teachers become the rulers of the collective, and if you then
refuse to obey them, protesting that they are not the whole of
mankind, they will answer: ‘By what means do you know that we are
not? Are, brother? Where did you get that old-fashioned term?’
for once, Rand is telling the truth. Note also that the old
collectivists referred to each other as comrades rather than
brothers. Implying that all men are naturally brothers is about the
only new wrinkle in their game.
you doubt that such is their purpose, observe with what passionate
consistency the mystics of muscle are striving to make you forget
that a concept such as ‘Mind’ has ever existed. Observe the
twists of undefined verbiage, the words with rubber meanings, the
terms left floating in midstream, by means of which they try to get
around the recognition of the concept of ‘thinking.’ Your
consciousness, they tell you, consists of ‘reflexes,’
‘reactions,’ ‘experiences,’ ‘urges,’ and ‘drives’-and
refuse to identify the means by which they acquired that knowledge,
to identify the act they are performing when they tell it or the act
you are performing when you listen.
acknowledge this is all true as well, but these days they aren't even
likely to be as kind about it. The thuggish, the unthinking, the
poised to action at mere command, the FORCE rather than the rational
conviction, is what's really wanted nowadays. Just push people
around and they'll be FORCED to go in the direction we desire, no
questions asked. That's what they want.
have the power to ‘consider’ you, they say and refuse to identify
the reason why words have the power to change your-blank-out. A
student reading a book understands it through a process of-blank-out.
A scientist working on an invention is engaged in the activity
of-blank-out. A psychologist helping a neurotic to solve a problem
and untangle a conflict, does it by means of-blank-out. An
industrialist-blank-out-there is no such person. A factory is a
‘natural resource,’ like a tree, a rock or a mud puddle.
as we are all these days “human resources;” just things to be
manipulated by the masters.
problem of production, they tell you, has been solved and deserves no
study or concern; the only problem left for your ‘reflexes’ to
solve is now the problem of distribution. Who solved the problem of
production? Humanity, they answer. What was the solution? The goods
are here. How did they get here? Somehow. What caused it? Nothing has
this also accords with much present policy, particularly of
governments and corporations with their bevy of think-tanks, NGO's,
foundations, etc. all set up to accomplish for the elites not for you
or I, what they want to achieve; their new worldwide concentration
camp, designed and manned by the collectivists and other thuggish
goons they hire to do their bidding. And who and what stands behind
all this? The money power, the banks and financial institutions of
proclaim that every man born is entitled to exist without labour and,
the laws of reality to the contrary notwithstanding, is entitled to
receive his ‘minimum sustenance’-his food, his clothes, his
shelter-with no effort on his part, as his due and his birthright. To
receive it-from whom? Blank-out.
mai'am, and what you say is beside the point, since you leave the key
information out of your argument. It is not product received from
whom that matters at all. That is what you would like the average
person to think, feel or understand, so you can castigate the
unfortunates of this world who you'd rather see ... going off
somewhere and dying quietly. Besides which, as all the world knows
only too dammed well, it is the rich who prefer not to work, not the
poor. As I said in another post on this blog, the poor are
subsidized to keep quiet; this manipulation by governments and the
bigs in society is to buy off a revolution their own greed would have
caused, since they have STOLEN much from the poor already and
continue to do so. The question Rand omits is, with what kind of
money does the poor man pay for his subsistence? That, as far as E.
C. Riegel was concerned, was the ONLY pertinent question.
what have you and yours done to prevent the poor man from achieving
more in life than he has accomplished? Put another way, what made
the poor man poor? Sometimes it is accident, sometimes it is
physical, sometimes genetic, often perhaps mental as in the person
was not really cut out to be doing a particular kind of work,
sometimes he / she is a casualty of the structural unemployment that
comes of technical innovation, but on whose terms was that innovation
introduced and with what consequences? Did anyone bother to think
seriously about any consequences when they decided to let the bigger
merchants come in and drive out their natural competitors, the mom
and pops? There are thousands of other ready examples. To be
continued in the next post.