This title was ‘borrowed’
from an interview given by the British historian David Starkey.
It has been often
said ‘the best lie that the Devil made was convincing people that he didn’t
exist’ that is the premise of this article.
This world has been bereft with lies and anger since cognition began at
the first bite of the apple though perhaps it was a little later after one son
killed the other son. As always, there
is the request to the reader to take note of what was going and when it was
happening; in short, the rules of years gone past are not rules of today.
Just for clarity, while uttering a lie it is not one of the
deadly sins, it is noted in the ninth of the Ten Commandments; which states ‘You
shall not bear false witness against your neighbor.’ For this author that Commandment is missing a
vital element, which is a part two which reads something like ‘and you shall
not bear false witness to your neighbor.’
The list below is neither exhaustive nor complete; it is
simply there to set the tone for expanding thinking. Hint – In Italian ‘Mio domando a te’ means ‘My
question to you’, this may crop up from time to time.
On slavery: The British and the United States of America
were the source of slavery has been the narrative for twenty to thirty years,
if not longer. Historically, there has
never been a major culture and many smaller cultures that have not engaged in
slavery. The Egyptians did it, the British did it, the Aztecs did it, the Arabs
did it, the Maury did it, the Chinese did it, and even the Portuguese did it,
at some point in time almost every culture engaged in slavery.
The slaves sourced
from Africa were sold into bondage by other
Africans, this was tribe on tribe warfare were the spoils of war was counted in
people. It is estimated that more
Africans were sold to the Middle East, probably due to lower shipping costs and
yet the population percentage of African descendents in the Middle
East is nearly zero; there is a single word answer to this
potential conundrum – castration.
The argument or
narrative that also must be put forth is the one about which countries worked
hardest and took losses to try to stop slavery. Please remember that was then and this is now,
in 1833 the British government borrowed mass sums of moneis to buy slaves from
the owners, a sum which was finally returned in full in 2015. Possibly the Americans paid the highest price
seeing as it was done in blood, an estimated two percent of the American
population in 1860, the estimated range is 620,000 – 850,000 and that was just
the solders. It must be noted that other
countries joined the anti-slavery movement, including though not limited to: Russia, Germany,
Brazil, and France.
The act of slavery
was rebranded into ‘indentured servitude’, which was basically the same thing
though it did come with a sunset clause for when the enslaved would be
released; my uncle was a victim of this when he first came to Canada in the
1950s.
‘My body, my choice’: has been the mantra
of feminism for many years now, though the tonality of that statement has been changed
over time. Many American women did not
join in with the suffragette movement because they linked rights and
responsibility and worried that gaining the vote would ensnare them into the
draft; as service grants you citizenship was the name of the game back then,
unlike it is today.
Once an equal voice
via the vote was granted without equal responsibility demanded as the
responsibility for service was carved out for women, the slippery slope got
started; no one at the time though neither knew the length nor direction of just
how far that slanting would go. When the
fairer of the two sexes came into play, the world changed for many people as
the character of the smothering mother was lifted above the personal and as such
it was made manifest for the communities at large.
For those not
familiar with the term ‘smothering mother’, it has been rebranded as both
‘bubble wrapping kids’ or ‘helicopter parenting’, both of which being terms
that might be better understandable for some. The acts of the ‘smothering mother’ is neglect
cloaked in kindness, which makes it so dangerous; for while in the moment, a
child may be rendered safe but in the long run that person has no coping
skills. For a parallel comparison, just
look to why so many children are now allergic to peanuts.
Looking back to the
original quote for this section, one can see how it promotes a level of
narcissism close to that of the ‘smothering mother’, as choices only are owned
by the one, while the future needs of the child are ignored. Yet, the term ‘my body my choice’ doesn’t seem
to have any utility when it comes to the protection of, or in support of, other
women. This position seems to be a single
issue, single state, and a singular circle Venn diagram where the female bodies
and the female choices are limited in other states and as of yet there is quite
the lack of decrying on the behalf of women in other lands where the rules are
not so open and respectful. Where were
the ‘my body my choice’ proponents when it came to the COVID vaccine?
Politics, power, and purpose: Most of the people in the Western world seem
to think that politics has to do with the governance or the management of a
parish, a province or state, and entire countries; the problem arises when the getting
of power and holding onto power are seemingly the only purpose. Even Mother Nature never holds power for no
reason, though it seems that nature is more reactive rather then proactive once
one looks at in the larger picture; still, one must wonder at the perfection of
such a system that sorts things out over time.
(In this paragraph the word ‘power’ was intentionally confused between meaning
‘influence’ and ‘force’, just to show the flexibility of how words can be shifted.)
Some context, by
which some clarity may be given to this point, no-one seeks power for no
purpose and when there seems to be no reason then the reason is probably money;
via money people can get what they want and that is simple power. Interestingly, there is an historical
question worthy of consideration: ‘why do so many politicians walk in skinny
and walk out fat?’
Looking at the poor
conditions that so many people in the First World
live in, it becomes obvious that the purpose of many in government is simply
service-to-self. Given enough time a fox
will get into the hen-house, and even worse, an even more sly fox will get in to
the effort of designing the next hen-house, this now seems to be the state of
many Western governments. Based on the
deficit spending via the money printing, it should be obvious that the foxes
have been building the ‘spending hen-houses’ for quite some time now.
Is Diversity
diverse: For about a decade the
Prime Minister of Canada has said that ‘diversity is our strength’ though what
that diversity looks like was never described or numerically qualified and so
no-one was given a map or picture of just what the perfect cultural enrichment
would look like. So now, about a decade
after that line was put forth we are seeing an infraction against Toronto
Municipal Code 950-300B, this would be the one about obstructing traffic on the
roads by pedestrians. And yet, for
months now in Canada
some streets in some cities have been blocked with Islamic prayer and protest though
only when the weather permits.
Now is the time for a
hypothetical that should be tested, how do you the reader assume that the
Metropolitan Toronto Police would react if each Christian/Catholic church was
to hold Mass on the main intersection outside their respective churches each
week; weather permitting of course, the same hypothetical can be done with the
all of the Synagogues of course.
Bigotry: who makes that decision? In the days of old when times were bold, and those
who invaded took over, the winners took control of the people and resources for
ever; or maybe not, as no-one invades forever.
Taxes were levied which can be seen as partial slavery, much like what
the Romans did with their territories and what Muslims do with the Jizya tax. Some problems, such as the amount of snow or
rain that falls, can not be fixed; yet when other problems that can be solved
though are not addressed, then it must be assumed that when those who can do
something don’t, then they just don’t care. This of course causes the biggest of problems;
begging the question - how far are you willing to go to solve a problem and to
what length are willing to go to solve someone else’s problem and would they
mind?
The situation that should be noted is that bigotry
seems to be inescapable in that always adding ever smaller groups to the list
of protected classes means that any given group will compete with some other
group to see who ends up being best served by those who signal some sort of
virtue and hand out the privileges.
Please bear with this
author for a moment while a political and mathematical exercise is played out
to address both bigotry and phobia. Grizzly
bears and Polar bears are in the top 1,000 feared animals on the planet, with
humans being number one by the way, yet being bear-phobic is not a thing, and
yet when it comes to some people with a certain mindset and/or ideology kill
more people than the bears per capita, though a label has be assigned to those
who express caution or fear of said persons.
The question then must be put forward as to what is the standard by
which people are allowed to be afraid of a thing and then be able to discuss it?
Conclusion: In the best democracies across
the globe the divide between the political Left and the political Right was
described as an isosceles triangle with a very narrow base; where the base of
the triangle was the list of problems to be solved, thus leaving the people to
decide if the left side or the right was the best way to narrow that base, and
the list of problems got reduced. Then after
1945, the base of the triangle was widened, and then it was widened again,
sometimes with purpose and so making our triangle obtuse in one direction or
the other.
Forty some odd years
or so ago, the political Right worked on managing the censoring of Western
societies in order to maintain power, recently or now depending on the country,
the political Left is doing exactly the same thing for precisely the same
reason; when the political party in power tries to halt the messaging of their
opposition then the goal seems to be just the Power that comes with being in
charge. When there is a good idea for
the many then that idea will flourish within that society and then it will stay,
though who decides what is good is, a completely different conversation?
The Noble Lie is
basically the ask by some, that the others aught to ignore any posteriori
knowledge, which is by the way, otherwise known as knowing something based on a
real world event and just go along with the given narrative. One sample of a noble lie can be found in the
phrase ‘Reproductive Rights’ as the act of birth seems to be nowhere in sight when
this slogan is brought forth. Though the
act of simulating reproduction as the goal, has now become ‘fucking’ obvious
for quite some time, thanks to the Internet, with sites like OnlyFans.COM
(online stripping for money).
The Noble Lie is
someone telling you that what you see and hear is untrue and that you have
lying eyes and ears; there is one small problem though; by which metric do you
measure the breadth and depth of what you see and hear? The narrative has taken precedence over the
facts; usually in the name of doing a good, though all the while the good never
seems to have been made manifest when one considers GDP per capita, the number
of homeless, along with drug use and drug death numbers.
