by Dalin Hale, xA.
Impinging events are happening at an increasingly
rapid rate. We are living in a time when one crises follows another in a way that makes in depth analysis formidable. A few
at a time take center stage while myriad others sink into a fuzzy background of neglect. The top stories of the day get worked
over with confidence and an air of authority. Skillfully, the need to be informed as responsible countrymen is gradually replaced
with the feeling of being informed. Who can keep up? That is one reason why we study history.
This is not a history lesson. The mere mention of
history can fill the average schooled mind with revulsion and cause it to recoil into an equally schooled retreat. In a way
it's about not wanting to hate the people that practice willful ignorance if I confuse them with the willful ignorance they
practice. In a way it's about escaping for real from the prison of corrupt context.
History? Project Delusion of Inform? PRODELIN? This
is not a history lesson. And this is not a focus on some single subject within an assumed context . It's about restructuring
the basic context of culture, in order to counteract everything that mitigates against examining the potential for perceiving
and avoiding an apocalyptic future that isn't exclusively believed by Christians, and is certainly not a subject exclusively
domained in any religion. The task of course is beyond my individual ability. It is a project for countless many to fulfill,
but one I hope to be significantly and synergetically adjoined to.
The willfully ignorant have no clue about anything
big or important beyond their exclusive selfishness, and their coyote switch goes off at the slightest hint of that which
they do not already believe. If they are Christian, then everything that isn't approved is of the Devil, and when evolution
is assumed the switch defaults to ignorance. They will wince at the idea that the only reason the prophets were able to foretell
the future of demise and destruction was because of it's periodic nature that is as predictable as the cycles of the celestial
bodies. In the words of an old Egyptian priest in the days of the Athenian ruler Solon, "There have been many divers destructions
of mankind, of which the greatest are by fire and water, and lesser ones by countless other means...". A complete fool looks
forward with gladness at the destiny of apocalypse.
They and the many other kinds of true believer have
silence as their big weapon. They leverage it over the fact that silence is often appropriate. They also use
it whenever something true, threatening, and incontestably relevant to themselves slips through. They seethe with a hatred
that they are only vaguely aware of. It is for them who I offer a counterprovocation against their imaginary defense mechanisms.
I don't think of myself as a genius and I'm quite above bragging. However, I am quite here to bring a guided challenge to
them. I know I can't do it all alone. It requires additional others who will not automatically foreclose on this theme
even when the inevitable insult ensues. The wilfulignorant are legion and they are potentially the force that can save the
future of mankind.
The Whole Onion
Umbrellic context is the big picture and thats pure
borellium for those who see the big picture as an uninteresting pollackimsest. I'm aware of the many who define themselves
with exclusivity which according to my intended meaning would preemptively block the possibility of the progressive comprehension
of umbrellic context. By the term exclusivity I do not mean the distinction of self that evolves with a purpose. I mean the
kind exemplified by an excluding identification with a certain genre of music, or particular sport or team, or profession,
or cartoon character, or social status, tax bracket, fortune 500 position, perverse spiritual poverty-vowed self abnegation,
self abnegation for it's own sake in general, or anything that has nothing to do with the character of any of our personally
distinct core identities. Their likes and dislikes are perpetually on parade and usually provide the extent of their self
definition. I ask that you allow yourself the freedom of expansion beyond your present state of expansion, without sacrificing
any of the values you hold dear. The umbrellic context is progressively comprehended thru this idealistic expansion.
To comprehend the problem and be able to communicate
solutions requires that we are able to convey meaning, and when vital context is missing or corrupt, it is hindered to say
the least. If the origins of culture are never centrally devised and are instead created in the timespans that evolution requires,
what happens when cultures are reinvented in order to serve goals alien to it's original purpose? Indispensable vertexes in
the geometry of context may be considered irrelevant and removed. Critical dimensions in harmony with and facilitating the
social inhibitions that are derived from an instinctual base may collapse under insufficient structure. War becomes the most
salient feature of history.
Umbrellic context is big, and perhaps the best way
to outline it is to leap from point to point and not tarry long on any one. It's a method of stepping back from the view where
single pixels dominate, to a view that makes sense as a picture. It could be wise to spend time on singular areas of interest
as long as it isn't at the expense of the comprehensive. It's a constant process of special discoveries, their interactives
and comparisons to the entire compendium of generalized principles. Invasive compartmentalization is a method that despotic
agencies use to blind the subjects to the picture that includes the despotic elements beyond a liturgical form. A subjugated
person that is dreadfully seeking salvation from the spectre of poverty is willing to concentrate on compartments of knowledge
put before him. Inclined in this training to perform technically advanced operations in a special field he is often sited
as evidence of the practical utility of mass forced education.
Context is discovered nestled in ever greater containers
of the same conceptual material and it is assumed here that our common most valued contexts are broken and generating a crisis
The two most often avoided subjects are religion and
politics. Is this because of the likelihood of unreasonable arguments ensuing from misunderstanding which in turn arises from
confusion when the words we struggle to find are themselves full of confusion.
This theme lacks traditional literary discipline
and I can only try to explain the full range of the barrier that is founded in the destruction of much of the supports needed
for it. Definition is murdered on a regular basis by the glut of propaganda that uses our most valued meanings as a mask for
intents that are usually opposite to them. 'Wars are fought for peace and we would be selfish not to bomb the vitals out of
those we've slated for liberation'. Even the once apparent absurdity of this is slowly draining away. The list is long and
many are tired of hearing about it, as they forget and are reminded and forget again, as the twist point is past where Orwell
spins in his grave like one of Edison's turbines. Top guns insulated by technological distance, bomb and strafe and never
see the faces that might attempt to appease them if they only got the chance. Human gestures are dismembered by remote control.
And they call it pacification and spreading liberty. Definitions are put up to the firing squad of partial truth and euphemism.
It Belongs Somewhere
I know the value of rational analysis coupled with
intuitive insight. I place rational analysis first because it appears from my perspective that intuition is the underdog,
oddly divided between the sexes. Separated from each other where instead they should be closely linked; abstractions that
normally work together, which never should be merged or dialectically synthesized, are when reinserted into reality, correctly
oscillated from one to the other's mutual functionality.
The Checkpoints of Sanity
Now perhaps so far I have only demonstrated how easy
it is to be arrested at the check points of sanity. Retrieving from the first paragraph, the skill whereby the feeling of
being informed supplants the reality is implying some sort of conspiracy, and in spite of the fact that many conspiracy theories
will never fly, way too many people believe that conspiracy theorists are mentally ill. And no conspiracy theory would be
complete without the context of a whole conspiracy that includes the decredibilizing of the theorist by the use of psychoanalytic
censure. We who are ascribed to the lunatic fringe are dismissed without due process. Politely or mutely we are merely tolerated.
There is an argument for Jay Leno who is a gatekeeper in favor of those who are not protesting too much.
In a vertextual leap related to pernicious social
control methods, the study of history is often associated with the drudgery of mandatory public education (mpe). In
fact, it is the institution of schooled drudgery that mitigates against all would-be naturally derived interests for those
so incarcerated. That is to say, the drudge is by design, and drudgery isn't even remotely related to the hindrances that
we find in a self propelled inquiry. Many treat the subject of mpe as an unassailable given, only they don't call it
mpe, just education. A sacred cow as it may, if you will, as it were. It may be amenable to a fair hearing if the question
is one of reform, but the lights go so often out if it appears that abolition is the angle.
The wall, 'all and all', is engineered from above.
Even the term 'public' in the term mpe is a corruption of concept, since it's a corporate government that sponsors
it, and is not in any sense derived from the lost or found common meaning of the term public. We-the-people as an aggregate
are never to be confused with the monarchially derived political entity of corporation. Core identities get lost on this false
crucifix when futile attempts are made to synthesize what is crossed but never touch.
The monarchial concept of corporation is in truth the more potentially
favorable to the cause of individual liberty than the concept of the corporation at liberty from the king, and likewise, the
concept of the corporation at liberty from any social controls that employs liberty in a sense that corrupts the original
qualifications of the term. At least there was the whim of the king to appeal to or trust depending on his character. The
American Constitution that declares the sovereignty of kings to belong to each and every individual is a logical substitute
for the whim of the singular monarch. Cultural chaos serves to force an abdication of the natural self-interested and uncoerced
duty of the many sovereigns to produce a concensus of policy true to the vision of the founders, we-the-people.
Thruover, the political constitution of corporations
mandate an evolution in a form of liberty that excludes the morality that is informed by the individual; again a form of liberty
absolutely contrary to the original qualifications of the term. Through the liberation of the corporations a monster has been
Ironically, the monarchial concept is partially resonant
with personal liberty exclusively through the concept of control. Regulation of corporations is the conceptual nemesis of
fascism, that state of government as sovereign over it's subjects by leading corporations or consortiums of such. By similar
reasoning, personal lib absolutely and uncompromisedly opposes corporate lib. There is no question of moderation.
Mainstream Credibility; the Antipixel
There is a problem that attends any attempt to exceed
the limitations of mainstream credibility. The concept of the mainstream is not here held as having more than an illusory
bearing, and that's not to say an unimportant one. To the extent of what some illusions may have on action, it cannot be said
that illusions are of no consequence. In fact, libertarian republics are deposed and tyrannies installed through a web of
them. Our basic training in so called citizenship is to learn to believe in the doctrines of the state while every effort
is made to undermine the ability to analyze and understand them. How else would the glaring contradiction exist of combined
liberty and democracy being served by forced attendance in schools that teach fear and obedience behind a facade of practical
knowledge? This contradiction isn't noticeable to it's victims after they've finished. Nice and good is truancy enforced education
in the minds of it's "graduates". They are legion, perplexed, thoroughly identified with their oppressor, and prone to endorse
violent defense against those who challenge it. We have before us an opportunity to study the most massive case of the Stockholm
A key question is: What is held to be mainstream and
how much is it associated as the sole domain of credibility? From where does this power originate, to decide without conference
what is or is not mainstream, with the attendant implication of relegating huge areas of valid speculation, questions, dissenting
opinions, research, science, and every sort of inquiry into the fringe as not worthy of consideration? A habit may ensue of
unconsciously sorting the great flood of potentially overwhelming information and perhaps crucial matters of a planetary magnitude
into one of two bins in an absolutely irrational method of oversimplification.
I have a book in my library that I began to read from
an interest in metatheology that was disappointed by it. In one part the author, an MD, carefully explains what he considers
the joys and benefits of cannibalism. Upon reaching that passage I was relieved of any reason to continue. This was a disqualifier.
The need to disqualify is not in question. Unconscious and automatic disqualification is.
There is a kind of disqualification based on priorities. Perhaps
the author of the book with the cannibalism passage was inspired by the ritual of Christian Communion. Perhaps a person can
be deluded in one area of knowledge and not in another. Perhaps he had many other things to say that many non-cannibals would
find valuable. But with an entire rhetorical library at our access and with only so much time, why don't we read him later?
Hence, disqualification by priority. And while we're at it, why don't we boycott every product that uses cannibalistic advertising
that puts a human face on our food. We could punish companies that animate hotdogs and send them running and screaming down
the street. Corporations that have given us the Doughboy, Mr.Peanut, and M&M people. I don't want to eat them. I don't
want my food to complain, have emotions, make humorous remarks, or express itself in any way. Its amazing how many bad ideas
get over in cartoons of pretended innocence. What has invaded the natural inclination of parents, making possible for them
to permit their children to set in absorbtion of this and other politically sanctioned corporation inspired rewrites of morality
itself? This criticism is liable to a diagnosis of inability to discern fantasy from reality, the subjects probable
projection of latent cannibalism, and paranoia. See how they work?
The Stigma of Mayhem
In disqualifying by ascripting to a wayward course,
the fringes of what might be termed a collective social course, the whole idea of the essential import of exploration itself
is undermined. In the words of psychiatrist R.D. Laing, writing apart from the straightjacket of his profession, the plane
may be out of formation, but that says nothing as to whether the formation itself is on course or not.
Disqualification by ascription of the fringe
to mental illness with it's stigma of mayhem by posing authorities is here the the main object of resistance. In the fringe,
gems of truth lie just around the corner from pornography.
Untamed and relatively uncensored, the fringe is not
yet a wasteland, but rather most probably the last frontier of freedom itself. Apart from "lunacy" and stultifying banality
lies the fringe, the only other ground left standing. Between "lunacy" and the stultifying banality that a total state would
terrifically inspire, lies the fringe; its very existence is a threat to the black and white generic fascist hypersimplicity
web of deception.
Posing authorities would be real authorities if they
were both able and willing to reasonably explain their disqualifications. What but the most relentless and deep conditioning
would allow such a one to function as an influence for guidance? To implore that someone is not worth listening to by implying
mental illness is exactly one that relies on conditioning and not reason to be effective.
# Implantable technologies, barium skies, public water fluoridation
#Deliberately spun issues of halftruth and hoax flooding the Internet.
#Daniel David Shaw wrote a book entitled The New American Police
State but thought better of the title, changing it to The USA Patriot Act, the Homeland Security Act, What They Really Mean.
Apparently too many people didn't want to read it because they are already way too scared.
# People who 'believe in God, Motherhood and the American Way of
Life and never think about any of them'.
Killing Kontext continued: Jitbox Boogie