Many’s the road I have walked upon
Many’s the hour between dusk and dawn
Many’s the time
Many’s the mile
I see it all now
Through the eyes of a child

Take it where you find it
Can’t leave it alone
You will find a purpose
To carry it on
Mainly when you find it
Your heart will be strong
About it

Lost dreams and found dreams
In America
In America
In America
Lost dreams and found dreams
In America
In America
In America

Your Saturday Afternoon Sanity Break

“I need a big man!”

That’s Robert Stack on the right. In the future he’ll star in “Airplane!” [continue reading…]

Written in 1548 and translated by Harry Kurz, 1942.

I should like merely to understand how it happens that so many men, so many villages, so many cities, so many nations, sometimes suffer under a single tyrant who has no other power than the power they give him; who is able to harm them only to the extent to which they have the willingness to bear with him; who could do them absolutely no injury unless they preferred to put up with him rather than contradict him. Surely a striking situation! Yet it is so common that one must grieve the more and wonder the less at the spectacle of a million men serving in wretchedness, their necks under the yoke, not constrained by a greater multitude than they, but simply, it would seem, delighted and charmed by the name of one man alone whose power they need not fear, for he is evidently the one person whose qualities they cannot admire because of his inhumanity and brutality toward them.

A weakness characteristic of human kind is that we often have to obey force; we have to make concessions; we ourselves cannot always be the stronger. Therefore, when a nation is constrained by the fortune of war to serve a single clique, as happened when the city of Athens served the thirty Tyrants,[4] one should not be amazed that the nation obeys, but simply be grieved by the situation; or rather, instead of being amazed or saddened, consider patiently the evil and look forward hopefully toward a happier future…. [continue reading…]

Supersonic

Iconic

In the face of this singular passion for conformity, this dread of novelty and originality, it is obvious that the man of vigorous mind and stout convictions is gradually shouldered out of public life. He may slide into office once or twice, but soon or late he is bound to be held up, examined, and incontinently kicked out. This leaves the field to the intellectual jellyfish and inner tubes. There is room for two sorts of them—first, the blank cartridge who has no convictions at all and is willing to accept anything to make votes, and, secondly, the mountebank who is willing to conceal and disguise what he actually believes, according as the wind blows hot or cold. Of the first sort, Harding is an excellent specimen; of the second sort, Cox.

Such tests arise inevitably out of democracy—the domination of unreflective and timorous men, moved in vast herds by mob emotions. In private life, no man of sense would think of applying them. We do not estimate the integrity and ability of an acquaintance by his flabby willingness to accept our ideas; we estimate him by the honesty and effectiveness with which he maintains his own. All of us, if we are of reflective habit, like and admire men whose fundamental beliefs differ radically from our own. But when a candidate for public office faces the voters he does not face men of sense; he faces a mob of men whose chief distinguishing mark is the fact that they are quite incapable of weighing ideas, or even of comprehending any save the most elemental—men whose whole thinking is done in terms of emotion, and whose dominant emotion. is dread of what they cannot understand. So confronted, the candidate must either bark with the pack, or count himself lost. His one aim is to disarm suspicion, to arouse confidence in his orthodoxy, to avoid challenge. If he is a man of convictions, of enthusiasm, of self-respect, it is cruelly hard. But if he is, like Harding, a numskull like the idiots he faces, or, like Cox, a pliant intellectual Jenkins, it is easy.

The larger the mob, the harder the test. In small areas, before small electorates, a first-rate man occasionally fights his way through, carrying even the mob with him by the force of his personality. But when the field is nationwide, and the fight must be waged chiefly at second and third hand, and the force of personality cannot so readily make itself felt, then all the odds are on the man who is, intrinsically, the most devious and mediocre—the man who can most adeptly disperse the notion that his mind is a virtual vacuum.

The Presidency tends, year by year, to go to such men. As democracy is perfected, the office represents, more and more closely, the inner soul of the people. We move toward a lofty ideal. On some great and glorious day, the plain folks of the land will reach their heart’s desire at last, and the White House will be adorned by a downright moron.

From BAYARD vs LIONHEART – Apologies Demanded

[HT: Rob De Witt]

Chinese document discussing weaponising coronaviruses provides ‘chilling’ information – Sky News host Sharri Markson has assessed “chilling” details from a document produced by Chinese military scientists, in which they discussed weaponising SARS coronaviruses five years before the COVID-19 pandemic hit. 
          Ms Markson said the book was written by People’s Liberation Army scientists and senior Chinese public health officials in 2015.
          The documents describe SARS coronaviruses as heralding a “new era of genetic weapons” and said they can be “artificially manipulated into an emerging human – disease virus, then weaponised and unleashed in a way never seen before”.
          The Chinese-language paper is called ‘The Unnatural Origin of SARS and New Species of Man-Made Viruses as Genetic Bioweapons’.
         “The document also talks about the psychological terror that bioweapons can cause, it’s chilling,” Ms Markson said.
         “To be clear … while intelligence agencies suspect, and they’ve been investigating this since early last year, that COVID-19 may be the result of an accidental leak from a Wuhan lab, there is no suggestion it was an intentional release.
          “The significance of this paper is that it offers a rare insight into how senior scientists at one of the PLA’s most prominent military universities, where high levels of defence research were conducted, were thinking about biological research.”

In another hundred years blacks will be blaming the Han for their low state, but the Han won’t care

— HappyAcres (@HappyHectares) May 7, 2021

[continue reading…]

Here’s to a man who has made my day, week, month…

by Donald Sensing

In the Middle East, however, wealth came from political power because there was no means to create wealth of significance apart of political power. So for centuries, nay millennia, the way to become wealthy there was first to gain political power. This pattern survives to this day. Saddam Hussein, for example, was a nobody of limited material means until he literally murdered his way into power in Iraq in 1979. It was after gaining control of Iraq’s government that Saddam became wealthy beyond all avarice.

Now the point of this little history lesson is this: In the United States, the means to create wealth and the exercise of political power in public office are being steadily unified. We are already well along to adopting a Middle East model. Since the Obama administration came into being, the wealthiest counties of America and the most politically-powerful counties of America have for the first tome become the one and same – all concentrated in and around Washington, D.C.

Through minute regulation of economic activity, America’s political class is deliberately suppressing wealth creation over the broad expanse of the country, while funneling tax dollars to favored cronies.

RTWT AT Sense of Events: America is adopting the Middle East model, and it’s not Islam

*1 Our political system is hopelessly corrupt. Virtually all politicians are hopelessly corrupt. No political party can be trusted. They all can be, and have been, bought.

*2 Democracy is a sham. It has been a sham for a very long time. There will never be any real democracy when money and power amount to the same thing.

*3 The system will stop at nothing to hold on to its power and, if possible, increase its levels of control and exploitation. It has no scruples. No lie is too outrageous, no hypocrisy too nauseating, no human sacrifice too great.

*4 So-called radical movements are usually nothing of the sort. From whatever direction they claim to attack the system, they are just pretending to do so, and serve to channel discontent in directions which are harmless to the power clique and even useful to its agendas.

*5 Any “dissident” voice you have ever heard of through corporate media is probably a fake. The system does not hand out free publicity to its actual enemies.

*6 Most people in our society are cowards. They will jettison all the fine values and principles which they have been loudly boasting about all their lives merely to avoid the slightest chance of public criticism, inconvenience or even minor financial loss.

*7 The mainstream media is nothing but a propaganda machine for the system and those journalists who work for it have sold their sorry souls, placing their (often minimal) writing skills entirely at the disposition of Power.

*8 Police are not servants of the public but servants of a powerful and extremely wealthy minority which seeks to control and exploit the public for its own narrow and greedy interests.

*9 Scientists cannot be trusted. They will use the hypnotic power of their white coats and authoritative status for the benefit of whoever funds their work and lifestyle. He who pays the piper calls the tune.

*10 Progress is a misleading illusion. The “progress” of increasing automisation and industrialisation does not go hand in hand with a progress in the quality of human life, but in fact will “progressively” reduce it to the point of complete extinction.

Originally published as part of Issue 65 of Winter Oak’s Acorn bulletin. Read the full bulletin here, or follow Winter oak on twitter here.

Van the Man has dropped a new album and the castrati hate him for it.

Nolte: Van Morrison Is Being Blacklisted for Anti-Media Song Van Morrison, the 75-year-old legendary singer-songwriter behind “Moondance,” “Gloria,” “Brown-Eyed Girl,” “Tupelo Honey,” and countless other classics, is being blacklisted for his latest act of WrongThink.

If you recall, late last year, Morrison began speaking out against the coronavirus lockdowns, which open states like Texas and Florida have exposed as anti-science.

“[T]hose who are shutting down our economy haven’t missed a paycheck since lockdown began. We are not in this together,” he tweeted in December. In a separate tweet, he added, “10 months on and the @niexecutive still hasn’t presented the science for the Northern Ireland lockdown.”

In September of last year, Morrison released three songs blasting the world governments’ lockdown policies. In November, Morrison teamed up with fellow legend Eric Clapton for “Stand and Deliver,” another song attacking lockdowns.

Naturally, Morrison and Clapton were vilified by the anti-science Woke Gestapo, especially those who infest the establishment media. Well, now, and only because he’s all kinds of awesome, Morrison has released “They Own the Media,” a blistering critique of the fake news media. Here’s a sample of the lyrics:…

As far as I’m concerned, Morrison and Clapton and Who frontman Roger Daltrey are three of the very few artists from the 60s and 70s who have remained true to what that era was supposed to stand for, which, if boiled down to a word, is Individualism. The rest, like the decrepit Rolling Stones, have completely sold out to The Man.

They tell us that ignorance is bliss
I guess by those that control the media, it is
They own the media, they control the stories we are told
If you ever try to go against them, you will be ignored

‘Cause they control
They control
They control

They control the narrative, they perpetuate the myth
Keep on telling you lies, tell you ignorance is bliss
Believe it all and you’ll never get, nеver get wise
To thе truth, ’cause they control everything you do

Everything you do
Everything you do
Everything you do [continue reading…]

“I shall never take My bodily form from any natural thing.” Yeats 0n what is past or passing or to come.

in·ter·nec·ine (ĭn′tər-nĕs′ēn′, -ĭn, -nē′sīn′)
adj.
1. Of or relating to struggle within a nation, organization, or group.
2. Mutually destructive; ruinous or fatal to both sides.
3. Characterized by bloodshed or carnage.
[Latin internecīnus, destructive, variant of internecīvus, from internecāre, to slaughter : inter-, intensive pref.; see inter- + nex, nec-, death; see nek-1 in the Appendix of Indo-European roots.]

Word History: Internecine was first recorded in English in 1663, and at that time was used with the meaning “deadly” as part of the phrase internecine war. The Latin source of the word, spelled both internecīnus and internecīvus, meant “fought to the death, murderous.” It is a derivative of the verb necāre, “to kill.”

However, in the 1700s, when Samuel Johnson was working on his great dictionary, he included internecine with the meaning “endeavoring mutual destruction.” Some scholars believe that Johnson’s definition was an error; that he misunderstood the prefix inter- as meaning “between” (which is its usual meaning) rather than as an intensifier meaning “all the way.”

Regardless of where Johnson’s definition came from, his dictionary was so popular and considered so authoritative that his definition sparked a slight shift in the usage of internecine. From this point, more and more people began to use the word to imply a type of conflict in which opposing sides attempt mutual destruction rather than one that is simply highly destructive and deadly.

This shift, which put the emphasis on a struggle between groups, paved the way for the eventual emergence of the sense that is most commonly used today, “relating to internal struggle within a nation, organization, or group.” This modern usage can be seen in the sentence “While he was becoming more and more closely drawn into the internecine politics of the Socialist party and its pro-Bolshevik and anti-Bolshevik offshoots, she was getting a broader sense of the country, of what the Russian experiment meant to various people” (Mary V. Dearborn). — — The Free Dictionary

“We have watched each click of the ratchet, ‘Zero HP Lovecraft notes, “as mindless pod people tell us that each new change isn’t really happening, it’s a crazy conspiracy, and also it’s good that it’s happening.

Have you ever seen Invasion of the Body Snatchers? Don’t waste your time on any version but the original from 1956. It’s a truly chilling film, one of the great classics of sci fi horror, and also a political allegory, as poignant today as it was then

In the story, alien seed pods grow exact replicas of the people all around you, and when you fall asleep, an alien consciousness grown from your pod takes over your body. At first it seems like a mass hysteria of Capgras delusion, but the aliens and pods turn out to be real

“I will not eat the bugs, I will not live in the pod” – this far right hate slogan exists because we know the people in charge want to make us eat insects and house us in bug hives. But Invasion of the Body Snatchers offers us a different way to imagine pod life

Progressives feel a salacious thrill when they imagine what common, ordinary things will be prohibited in the future. This is the sacrifice that the god “progress” demands – each generation gives up a slice of humanity – and they call this “humane”

We’ve all heard them say it, that perverted thrill they feel when they imagine their own futureshock. “one day, people will see meat-eating as cruel and barbaric” – These cancerous prohibitions are always latent in the progressive mind, then one day they metastasize …

The first time I was politically awake for it was the normalization of homosexuality. Public opinion flipped over night. One day, Obama himself was against it (lie) and the next day your very own friends were taking you aside in private to tell you to stop calling things gay.

Since then it’s happened two more times in rapid succession: first with transsexuality, and second with Bowels Loose Movement. In 2014 they were a minor nuisance, in 2020 everyone spontaneously bent the knee. They did that because people instinctively submit to power.

RTWT AT Thread by @0x49fa98 on Thread Reader App