The Power of Play

by morton_h, the blogger

There are basically two ways to overcome or prevent stagnation in this world. Be it in business, in politics, in the social structures, in your mind, in your spirit or in your body.

One way to understand it, is by applying the Hatha Yoga attitude of overcoming pain. This is the practice of molding and shaping your entire being by working on/with your body. Knowing of course, that the body is the access to your mind and spirit.

Since this is NOT a blogpost about Yoga, consider this as an example.

Anyone who has practiced the classic series of Hatha Yoga excercises will know, that there eventually will be a moment of pain where a part of the body reaches its boundary of stagnation, and the response of the body is pain, meaning you are onto something. Since the human psyche is geared to avoid pain, the normal response is to go any other way. Your body remembers and withholds pain and your brain and spinal chord fights or flees any pain.

The Yoga practitioner thinks otherwise and un-chooses beforehand the mental-physical escape route. The pain is where you should linger in order to overcome pain and the courses of pain. But how to linger, that is the question?

1. The first method is to go into the pain, identify the exact location, intensity and quality of the pain, accept the pain while confronting it. A strange thing will happen: the pain will start to move its position, its intensity and its quality. The pain is on retreat, and eventually it may even dissolve. You have broken the stagnation.
   
   
2. The second method is by breathing and removing the awareness of pain into a sort of pre-release of the pain. You are already beyond pain while still in pain. The breathing is a kind of meditation in motion transcending both pain and physical limitation.
   
   NB! The second method is NEVER a denial of the pain. This is where the New Age deception comes in. New-Agers deny pain and darkness. New Age is the late-20'th century escapism picking up those who fell out of Christianity.

The Daoists would call the two methods the yang way and the yin way. The masculine and the feminine way (not the male-female way). The way of the warrior and the way of the monk. The methods are not, what some may believe, opposite and contradictory. They are complementary. The warrior and the monk may very well be contained within the same person.

So

You can either focus on the obstacles or the beyond-obstacles. You can either reveal and release the pain held in darkness, or you can invoke the light hidden from the too-much-darkness.

Problem

• If those, who investigate the darkness are in denial of the light and have fallen in love with the darkness to the extend, that they can no longer act but hold themselves in a state of analytical paralysis, which is one kind of imbalance.
• If those, who invoke and promote the light are in denial of the darkness, and have fallen in love with the light to the extend, that they can no longer think clearly, but hold themselves in a state of wannabe bliss, which is another kind of imbalance.

We need to avoid the yin-trap and the yang-trap.

We need to maintain our ability to feel, think and act.
We need to learn about the Dao.

There are plenty of well meaning people, thinking and highly skilled analytical people with great concerns for the World of Dystopia caught in translation, tending to fall in almost-love with this World of Dystopia or even their own pain, but unable to act.

There are also plenty of well meaning people, emotional people with great empathy and longings for a World of Release tending to fall in almost-love with an ideological illusion, caught in a World of make-beliefs and self-projections.

In a conversation, these people will most likely try very hard to convince the other, that they have the right attitude and view of any given subject or problem and that the others are wrong.

How to Avoid It

Make sure to test your analyzes within action. The yin needs the yang, since stagnated analyzes is too much yin

Make sure to test your make-beliefs by going back to grammar of thinking (what, where, who and when), since stagnated emotional beliefs and ideology is too much yang.

The yin should be liberated, envigorated and balanced (the Dao) by the presence of yang and vice versa. Some of the stagnation or conflicts we see among people is due to the missing envigoration. An example is the relationships between male and female after the more than half a centure old implantation of Feminism in Western culture, that made it almost impossible for a lot of men and woman to have fruitful and stable relationships - and for children to benefit from that. You see broken marriages, broken families, conflicts, disrespect and destruction of natural polarity and complemtarity all over the Western world, spreading to the East and the South since Western Imperialism and predatory Capitalism has exported the cultural imbalances.

Much of the imbalance and distorsion is, as many have realized, here by design and purpose, as was Feminism. As was any ideology. Certain destructive forces with great power and ill intent have used and almost perfected imbalance as a means of self-empowerment on behalf of other. But since that long and winding road is not the subject today - the subject is examining possible ways to regain balance and dissolve distorsion - and since we are looking at just one field of distorsion, the actual recognition and thorough analyzis of the source and course of distorsion is one way. Or should we say: one important component of any way.

What Fenimism was all about

We May Ask

1. Should we concentrate on the recognition of the present distorsion forming the future - and maybe as a side kick trace back, what came before?
2. Should we even forget of what came before, because only present and future matters?
3. Should we forget about the present and know everything about what came before to ever be able to trace forward from the past and thereby recognize the present and the future?

The answer is - of course - that it is highly complementary. May we be reminded of the Orwellian frase (here refrased):
Manipulation of history is a way to control the future by the present.

Meaning
If people are highly confused about their origins, their past, their history, their culture, their traditions, their people, their nation, their gender, their race, all that came before, all primordial - and being confused is a present matter - they will never be able to influence their future.

Meaning then:
If some minority would want to confuse the majority, they would need to steal the history of the majority, their past, their-all-that-came-before and replace it with something else, a construct, a perversion.

NEVER UNDER ESTIMATE THE POWER OF NEITHER FALSE NOR TRUE HISTORY!

This is why, I would not recommend any of the statement above: forget about the past, forget about the present. If you want to forget about the future, be my guest. It will arive anyway. But if you want to forget about your past and your present, you and we will have a problem.

A Fourth Statement

• We need to know enough about our past, knowing that knowledge will evolve and unfold as we recognize the consequenses of past into present.
• We need to look at the present with the optics of 'presented' past, the consequenses of past arrived at the present. We are a product of decisions made by our forefathers - and those who pulled their legs.
• We need to visualize a future based on actual dreams of a future, not based on pro-grosis, machine statistics, grand-scale planners or fictive escatological / apocalyptical scenarios. 

THEN WE NEED TO BE FULLY PRESENT.

We Need

• People that are dedicated and therefore becoming skilled at trawling through the Labyrinth of History with all its falsifications, 'noble' lies, omissions, re-arrangements, re-makes and what-not's.
  Looking back.
• People that are dedicated and therefore becoming skilled at spotting and describing the imbalances of our time.
  Looking into.
• People that are dedicated and therefore becoming skilled at visualizing and realizing.
  Looking forward.
• We need thinkers and developers and people willing and able to act while thinking.
• We need visionaries and true dreamers (not escapists).
• We need the passionate and the couragious.
• And: We need to play!

What we do not need is infighting among those, who are qualified in either of those directions. We need conversations. We may disagree, we may be at different stages of knowledge, we may have chosen different angles or fields of mental expansion and developement. We do not need to have others shut up. Which is what the socalled thinking segment of mainly Liberal academics with their political correctivism spend all their energy on.

The Power of Play

Did I say: We need to play? Did I say why?

Maybe go back to former blogpost Imagine and Play. But I will further suggest, that Play is the flow of Nature, the Universe. By playing we overcome stagnation and by playing imballance with dissolve itself. The Play is the Dao, the Dao is The Play.

Someone asked me: But how to play, if I forgot it?

No you didn't, is my first answer. You are always playing, when you forget not to play. Didn't you play with your children? Don't you enjoy helping them to maintain their ability to learn by play? And I hope you play, when you have sex and don't regard it as a routine, a duty or piece of hard work ;-)

It's like musicality. Someone would say: Oh, but I am not a musical person, but I love good music.How can that person not be a musical person? It takes the equal amount of musicality to perceive music as to perform music, since music is neither the compostion / the score, the performer, the media nor the sound. Music is an event, a resonance where the created is re-created within the receiver. If you are not creative, you cannot recreate. What the person meant, of course, was: Oh, but I am not a performing musician, and that is different. But if the audience did not have the equal amout of musicality, the musician or the composer would perform in vain. The event, music, would not occour.

Furthermore musicality is not limited to music. I would suggest, that a true conversation - meaning not a monologue, a lecture - is a human piece of music. Some of the most perfect classical music is composed by J.S. Bach. A musical form, which he mastered to ultimate perfection, was the fugueconsisting of two or more parts actually performing the same theme, but never simultanious. When a part, a voice, an instrument doesn't perform the fugal theme, it performs a complementary counterpart. This musical form once was characterized as an exquisite conversation among learned people, which is exactly what it is. A second part may even start the fugal theme before the first has finished. It sounds like chaos, but is highly organized and total balanced. Listen to women having conversations. It may sound like a chicken den to men, but these chicks are able to talk and listen at the same time.

The Musical Offering

 

Cronos

A strange phenomenon arrives by both performing and listening to a good performance of this music. Time is bended and even dissolved. Infinity seems to be build into it. Don't we all know that phenomenon? When we are not bored - when we in fact are playing - time is kind of infinite. It flies until we realize it, and then it lands again. It went so quickly, we say, when we in fact mean the opposite: it wasn't there. When we are bored or stressed, it is very finite. It sticks to the no-fly-zone. It feels so long, we say, when we in fact mean that the density is heavy.

Time is Cronos eating its own children. Which could refer to an actual celestial event where the planet Saturn became de-ignated or un-loaded as the former sun of our solar system whereby the planet Helios became ignited / loaded, or should we say positively charged. Cronos / Saturn swallowed a certain amount of celestial objects, that became its rings.

See The Thunderbolts Project

http://www.thunderbolts.info/

Cronos as Goya saw him

Astrologers would say, that Saturn is the controller of time. The satanic / saturnian quality is therefore the prison of time. The rings are the chains. Someone even mentioned, that the meaning of the Lord of the Rings or Richard Wagners The Ring (four huge operas) is the struggle for the un-casting of the Saturnian power. I will suggest, just a theory, that it is Saturn / Cronos itself, that is in chains, in rings, and that it is the enslavement of the Saturnian force, that produces the time prison. Saturn may be the local second sun of the Solar system, whereas the star Sirius is the real second sun in the Galactic scale. Who knows? Maybe Saturn wil re-ignite and be 'liberated' with the return of Sirius, that started appr. 400 years ago where Sirius shifted from being a red star to a blue star (according to the rule of starlight called the red shift, where objects removing themselves from our place is red and objects approaching is blue). And then we are not talking about immense amounts of time, but just a cycle of 24.000 years. The story of Cronos and all the other myths of anthropomorphic celestial objects or Gods and Godesses, meaning the birth of the Archetypes is not in some undefined past but within human memory! And that would, of course, include certain catastrophic events, that seems to have traumatized the human race(s).

This is the Great Play of the Universe / the Galaxy / the Solar system. We could go the other way in scaling: the cell, the molcule, the atom. And just in the middle of this scaling is the dimensions of the human being. Or is that just because we happen to be so? Hard to tell. By the way, if you have come to believe, that the Earth has become flat again like in the Catholic Middle Ages - and there is a meme flying around right now, believe it or not - all this is total bunkum. We are living on a pancake, and the Universe is a projection inside a giant dome. Be my guest ...

But how to regain the power of play, the flow of the Universe? C'mon tell me!

Sorry, there is no single recipe. And why would I know it, I am no enlightened guru or expert? But I seldom get bored, except when I have to do something I didn't chose myself, that is repetetive and not challenging. And if we sell our working ablities to someone else to make a living, we will eventually run into that. Apart from that, I always find some new playground.

What I can say is what I actually do, when going into or am in the middle of the play / the creative process. Whether I would be the right to do it, is questionable. Much has been said and written about creativity. Some bogus also, but that is probably due to the fact, that human consciousness is hard to describe. A fish doesn't know what water is before it is pulled out of the water. We can't see what we are made all up of.

I'll try anyway.

Thoughts on Creative Methodology and Attitude

You need an offspring, an ignition. Some would call it inspiration. The Greek called in amusement, since the Muses were the 'goddesses' or the personified forces of the arts. It may even be a musical partner, a Muse - here we go again, and remember we are talking about musicality in the broader sense. Anyone can be a Muse, and it goes beyond gender. As a composer I was amused by my English friend who is a great poet and former playwright. He would send me a bunch of poems to read, and one or more would resonnate with me. It would make me curious and I would start to develop a very vague overall feeling of the may-be-coming piece of music.

So the offspring already contains a structure. Language already contains rhytms = series of stresses and un-stresses = a metrum. Words contain meanings and emotions. But before going into the details, I would have this audible vision of a finished piece sort of coming from a distance, a sort of creative dream. So find your ignition, find your muse.

Another method needs more luck and can go wrong - though it may actually work and succeed. Just start somewhere in total blindness and ignorance not knowing where you will end. I once wrote a novel that way, and it can be great fun. Start somewhere, introduce a character, place it in a situation, create a dilemma or a riddle, take it from there, surprise yourself, amuse yourself.

Painters may do the same. They are 'in process'. Take a look at the documentary 'Vinterbillede' released by the Danish Film Institute (taken off YouTube now, but you can order it for borrow at any serious library), where the internationally known master painter, Per Kirkeby, does something like 10 different paintings on top of each other, each a brilliant painting in itself, but since he didn't stop his process, he just painted over and over till he was satisfied. Which by the way makes the film an artwork in itself.

The man at work - or is he at play?

He just started, and then amused himself. You go into a dialogue with yourself and the material, you produce. You make a kind of split brain or inner distance. In music you become your own audience, appreciating, experiencing, suggesting where to go next. You play with your self ... that didn't come out well ;-) ... but in fact the creative process has a certain element of intermediary narcissism. I would rather call it self-love, self-nurture and inner dialogue.

The Artists Way

Which leads to another important aspect of the creative process, the process of play. You must un-learn and avoid being dominated by self-censorship. Don't censor youself too soon, get it out, so you can see it / sense it. Then critizise, never before.

You may want to check out Julia Cameron and her book The Artists Way. As a spiritual person - which you may find appealing or not appealing according to your personal view - she describes creativity as God's gift to Us and using that creativity as Our gift back to God. Or the Universe or the Great Nature, if you got stuck with the angry Jahwe-figure with a long beard.

Julia Cameron also points out, that artists seldom are loners but create in communities. So find your playmates, let them provoke and invoke you. Let them amuse you.

Take a look at some of her tools:

The Morning Pages

https://vimeo.com/21502701

This is a kind of therapy for artists - and actually for others than artists too. You wake up in the morning and write down all your thoughts without censoring or trying to be artful. If you wake of grumpy with all your morning hatred, they will be your Mourning Pages. It cleans your mind so that all your negative thoughts will not be in you way for the rest of the day. Grump them out by writing them down. Or if you wake up with crazy thoughts or in the middle of an unfinished dream, write it down. Anything goes. Three pages only. Then your day-brain starts to take over.

So: avoid self censorship, but also avoid spontanious refusal of other people's ideas and avoid creative obstruction. There will be a place for killing you darlings, or whatever they call it in the film industry, but the morning is not a place for that.

The Artist Date

https://vimeo.com/21502471

With her own words: Once a week, go on a solo date with youself alone for the purpose of enchanting yourself and wooingyour consciousness like a lover. People are reluctant to go play, they would rather go work. But all creativity is drawing from an inner well, and if you work too hard, you are fishing from that well, and the well will eventually run dry unless you fill it up.

So if you get stuck, don't try too hard. Do something completely different. Many artists have two personalities, the civil person and the artist, that will fill the other up with energy. An artist date, therefore, is a deliberate refill of you consciousness.

The Lady has written 40 books on art and creativity!

Get Rid of the Vacuum

Next: set some rules. Nothing is more frightening that unlimited possibilites. You will be paralyzed with no limits. Limits are your best friend. Horror Vacui (fear of empty spaces) may be you worst nightmare.

This is why my relationship with poetry in making music making was a perfect trampoline. The limitations and the stepping stones were already there.

There are many stepping stones. The painters and the composers of the Middle Ages and Renaissance knew the Palimpsest and the Parody. The palimpsest is the paint-over, like Per Kirkeby doing an auto-palimpsest as a process of painting. The Parody is 'stealing' or samling a preexisting piece of music, it may be from someone else or from yourself, and using it as a starting point. You take the ownership and bring it onto you own ship in your own direction. There was no silly, paranoid copyrights in the Middle Ages, art was not corporatized, and the genious self-centered artist of the Romantic era did not exist. You could steal any idea and concept, because everything in art was kind of Open Source. That is why you often don't find the signature of an artist on the Medieval artwork. We do not know the name of the master builders of the Gothic cathedrals. And the Farao Keops, for sure, did not order the building the pyramid of that name, because he was not born in that age in time - but that's another story of Empires cultural theft.

What I am talking about here, is not like the Romans being so jealous of other people and cultures, that they had to steal their cultural achievements and then destroy these cultures. I am talking about the harmless and benevolent 'theft' of ideas, shapes, forms, structures thus making them you own. The thing is, that having stolen and played / worked with it, it will transform and morph into something else, and should it eventually return to the 'victim' of theft, it will be experienced as a fresh new structure. It would be the phenomenon, Julia Cameron calls community creativity.

It Can't Go Wrong

Especially in storytelling, be it in book form or in spoken og visualized form, the archetypes are magnificent creative forces, like small nuclear bombs of dynamics. It is the story of Joseph Campbell's The Hero with a Thousand Faces, the never ending story of gaining selfhood. These dynamics were true for our ancient forefathers as for us as they will be for our descendants. Knowing that there is nothing new under the Sun, we may drop our anciety of not being so damn original. And moreover, knowing that the same story will end up being fresh and new and different all the time, makes it even less frightful to create. It can't go wrong! Say to yourself: It can't go wrong, It can't go wrong ... make it you benevolent mantra and just do it.

The Must-Read of books

And make your mistakes. For Gods .. and your own sake make a hell of a lot of mistakes! Be shameless of your mistakes and even showing them to others. Afterwards admit them, laugh of them, learn from them. But without mistakes there is no progress. My estimate is, that some of the most stunning inventions of this World and in human history are made by shere mistake. Which is why It cant go wrong. You know what I mean! Of course it can go awfully wrong and you can end up killing someone or yourself in dangerous creativity. But I am not talking about irresponsible experiments. The world is filled with psychopaths doing just that on the expense of everyone else but themselves, and don't get me started here.

What I am talking about is the playful, self forgiving (the most difficult person to forgive is yourself), humorous, and bat-out-of-hell'ish attitude, that will make any play and any creation totally possible. With that in mind, it will become impossible to indulge youself with the fear of your own inadequacy. Your low self esteme has no place on earth. And you cannot suffer any longer from destructive perfectionism - uhuh, it has to be so-and-so perfect, before ...! I see this shit all around me, and it pisses me off, pardon my French! I mean, instead of two regular writers on this blog, I reckon there could be at least seven or more. You guys know who I am talking about, and you may want to reexamine your petty excuses for not making your knowledge available, since the world needs this knowledge now, for Gods sake NOW!

And again, this does not mean, that you should let any old unfinished and sloppy piece of work out. What I am saying is, that you should practice the delay of self critique to where it belongs: The Finish. Or even better: In Wave-Form. Make it a cycle: Let it out - do your critique - let it out ... aso. This is the split brain I was talking about. Be your own audience, your own reader, your own viewer, but don't punish and suppress yourself by doing creative obstructions onto yourself. Also remember: what you do to yourself, you will do to others. If you censor yourself, you are a part of the censorship of the global call for censorship. Is that what you want?

Keep it Tight - and Don't Keep it Tight

Same-same but totally different. I am talking about two things. When you have an idea, when you conceive a new project, don't go out and tell it to the world. And why not? Because it will destroy your idea and your project.

This is a piece of psychology rarely talked about. Haven't you noticed from yourself and others, that we often brague about our New Year's resolutions? We tell it loud and clear, that we hereby have declared the solemn decision for the new year to become a better person by starting so-and-so. And what happens? After two-three weeks you fall into you old habbits. And why is that so?

It is due to a strange program in the brain being activated by prematurely announcing what is not yet a reality. The brain then thinks, that it is already a reality and therefore shuts off the initial energy needed for the bringing about.

What you should do instead, is keep it in your heart like a hen on the egg untill the chicken jumps out and begins to squeek. Even then you should be careful as a responsible and a caring chicken mother not to let it all hang out and run open. There a predators / destructive forces out there - and more important: in there - that can kill a yellow fluffy chicken.

On the other hand, when your creation has grown to a certain extend, and when you know that it already is an inevitable reality, do not keep it tight! Make it available, make it open source, make it mutual fruitful to others. Let it all hang out. What happens then, is that you will receive more that you have provided. An effect of synergy will emerge.

I see a lot of angst and paranoia in that phase of creation.

• What if others should steal my creation/idea and profit from it?
• What if I don't get recognized and payed for my creation/idea?
• What if my creation is not ready for exposure because it is not strong enough?

You have probably heard about the Law of Jante. This is the mental auto-immune-defect version of the Law of Jante.

One example from the applied field of holding tight (to the body) creations, that by now could have been a beneficial reality for the whole of humanity. It is the field of Pure Energy Systems (PES). I prefer this term instead of Free Energyor Alternative Energy, since nothing in the Universe is free, and since 'alternative' is much to un-ambitious just meaning wind mills and solar cells that are totally unsustainable when you figure out the total costs. These are already obsolete technologies.

Pure Energy Systems are right now the best kept secrets, since no one knows about them, since no media tells about them and since no politician (being stupid anyway) are told about them.

With the exception of mr. Pure Energy System himself, Nicola Tesla, later genious inventors all kept their technologies for themselves. Or - I don't want to do these important people injustice - were kept for themselves by certain predators, like Tesla himself.

The Inventor par Excelence

What I am talking about here, is the keeping too close of inventions while being un-aware of the enormous benefits they - and the rest of the world - could have had with a proper open-source attitude. Get it out and make it real! What the inventors did instead was to keep it a potential business secret, thinking that this invention could make them rich and succesful. What they didn't recognize was, that certain groups of watchers, observers, sharks-in-the-ocean did not play by the rules. Result: one day they had their inventions stolen, then destroyed (after being stolen, that is - and do we know that from studying the Roman strategy of cultural/technological theft-and-destruction?) and themselves being character-destroyed, professionally destroyed or even physically destroyed.

Had these brilliant genious'es and inventor-nerds been as brilliant in strategy as in science, we would all have benefitted from their inventions, and the World as we know it would have been totally different. They should have spread their blueprints like a virus, so that enyone with a brain and an urge could have copied and realized it. AND - they would have been rich and famous by doing just that!
Forgive them, for they knew not what they did (semi-quote from mr. Jesus).

Let me hereby round up this blog by saying:

Dear Friends!

Protect your good stuff while in creation.
Be responsible to you creation and yourself.
Make it become real.

Expose your good stuff while created.
Be responsible to the rest of the world and to generations to come.
Make a real thing real.

You may want to read: Imagine And Play

Talking about conspiracy theories

by morton_h, the blogger 

If we want to discover, to learn or to know something, we need to have a hint, a feeling, a sensation, a recognition of patterns, maybe a suspicion. When we become aware of what creates this sensation and these patterns, we call it knowledge.

[scroll for at læse på dansk]

Put in a more academic way:
All sound evidence collection and processing of information to a state of knowledge - in its purest form called science - need a certain phase of creating theories. Without powerful, dynamic theories, no answers to any questions.

When the necessary and benevolent phase of theory making = our perceptions, sensations, pattern recognition, suspicions - is blocked, it becomes an act of sabotage of the creative and inquiring phase in any healthy knowledge process whereby actual knowledge is delayed or directly fails to arise.

A theory is a stepping stone on the road, not the other shore. If you are not allowed to step anywhere, you are doomed to fall in the water. Unless you know the Jesus-stunt.

Without theories, informed guesswork, temporary answers to the questions (+ a heck-of-a-lot of questions!), stopovers and summaries of acquired knowledge and the results obtained by putting the knowledge parts together for the first time, there will be a desert of chaos, stupidity and fear. The so-called 'Dark Ages' was a period when this desolate prevailed. The reason - the simple version - was because the church had monopolized knowledge and prevented ordinary people to take part in actual knowledge. And more important: had taken away the right and incitament for the people to seek knowledge by asking questions telling them, that faith, belief and hope was all there was. We, the cleracy, will talk to the Universe for you and see to that you get the 'right' version.

The Dark Ages seem to have returned in a new costume. The term 'conspiracy theory' and its use in public discourse is a taboo and religion-style denigration of curiosity, honesty and inquisitiveness and an attack against all sound knowledge processes.

Healthy theory should not contain too many assumptions. This corresponds to too many and too weak indices in a legal inquiry. A recent study showed surprisingly that people who were frequent users of the word 'conspiracy theory' made many and quick assumptions and that those they called 'conspiracy theorists', in turn, asked many questions and made fewer assumptions. However, one must of course be careful with so-called studies, but it was still strange. Almost Biblical in its psychology (you can actually find some good stuff in the Bible): 'And why beholdest thou the mote that is in thy brother's eye, but considerest not the beam that is in thine own eye? (sorry, I couldn't help taking the old dusty King James' version ...'. Or just plain: 'It takes one to see one'. Or in psychological terms: projection.

An example of that would be, when the term exploded into public discourse, which is after 9/11. Everyone questioning the pre-fabbed official version were called conspiracy theorists ... for asking question alone, because they did not put theories fourth in those days. The government and its true believers on the other hand promoted, lo-and-behold: a genuine conspiracy theory! And a grossly absurd one too: The theory about a man in a cave in Afghanistan with long beard and a laptop outsmarting the most advanced defence system of the world with the help of a bunch of pupils that had just learned to fly a one-engine Cesna, who made seven buildings fall to the ground in the most beautifully organized way violating a dozen laws of physics, aso ... Oh sorry, according to the Bush theory there were only twobuildings. After a while and because of the theory the Iraq War started on a(nother) thick Bush-lie about WMD's - even the dumbest people knew that after a month - but right before the guy was telling us the truth!

This is just one example of how the c-word works: it mades us stop all proper thinking. In the case of Bush it was accompanied with a certain amount of religious clichees like: 'Either you are with us, or you are with the 'terrorists', the concept of terror as you remember being another new speak concept that blossomed vigorously during the same campaign (VNAC: Vocabulary for the New American Century). The fear of conspiracies being exposed (pov: the conspirators) and the fear of mentioning conspiracies and thereby insulting the conspirators (pov designed for: the people) is similar to what the dark-age religion, the Catholic Church, created. God, the great auto-conspirator, works in mysterious ways. And should any mortal = employee in the human branch of the cosmic body (the Corporation) question whether this usurpatory god, who has taken credit for the creation of the Universe, is competent for the job based on the very same gods rather poor business case, then burning logs will fall from the sky.

If we stripped the c-word for its malicious intent, 'conspiring' would just mean 'to be inspired in each other's company'. Question is, can you destile words from their historical context? Actually yes, and here you will see clearly, in what way and what extent words can be weaponized and a spellcan be cast.

The historical load is: a small group of people in fora outside the attention of the many are making decisions about actions that will hace significant implications for the many, without asking them for advice or permittance. These measures have large, decisive and far-reaching consequences for the many and their descendants. Give me an example of an important historical event, where this was not the case! The use of conspiracy as synonymous with 'fanciful rubbish' is therefore highly non-historical. It is the norm, not the exception.

The opposite of conspiracy is either 'pure chance' or 'evolution'. Darwinism's main theory is all about chance and mutation as the guiding force in evolution = history, since social-darwinists 'biologizes' history. The British and later the Anglo-American elite scientific support - they use even the word of why exactly THEY had the right and duty to rule over other people in the world, called Darwinism or 'social-Darwinism', same-same. Where hace I heard this before, 'Thou shalt rule over the creatures of the Earth'? Oh, but darwinism was opposed to Christianity, so it can't be from Genesis, can it?

Not surprisingly the specific concept of 'conspiracy theory', the combination of the two words, came from one of the Anglo-American / Transatlantic elitist think tanks, the paramilitary organization called The Rand Corporation. A senior executive from this corporation recommended a CIA director to respond to the persistent and annoying questions that crescended after the Warren Commission's cover-up of the Kennedy assasination by simply and without the blinking of an eye denying everything and label all inquisitive citizens and journalists with the hybrid term: conspiracy theorists! Just after 9/11 another big scale cover up took place, and the c-word was aquired once again.

?? And here we go again: these irresponsible parasites on human culture - an ancient business - are simply scared of questions, and the c-word is their venomous defence against questions. Re-spons-ability: the will and ability to answer questions, as for instance: 'What are you up to? Is that beneficial to others than yourself?' The global parasite class is responsable impotent.
 
The Law of Jante (well known to all Scandinavians) and statements about conspiracy theories work so well together, that we could consider them as synonymous. The second can be formulated in terms of the first:

• Do not think you can form an overview over theories
• Do not think you can ask questions
• Do not think you get answers by asking questions
• Do not think that there are answers to those questions
• Do not think you have the right to ask and theorize
• Do not think you have the opportunity to know
• Do not think you have the right to know
• Do not think that thereis  a bigger picture, for everything is random 
• Do not think that you can find the bigger picture since it is not there
• Do not think that if you find it anyway, that people are going to listen
  (and if they do, we have certain measures and methods ...)

Laws are formulated by those in power in order for them to keep their power. They always claim the deep concern of the people, but people normally just need common sense. How come we go around af ordinary people censoring and policing each other, wouldn't you expect decrees to go out a from Caesar Augustus that all the world you know ...? (good old King James again) Yes, but the scary, non-human and virus-like with this word is, that it comes out of the mouths of non-powerful people and without hesitation is spit in the face of other non-powerful people. The word has contaminated peoples speech organs globally, now infecting human being like AIDS, SARS, H1N1 or Ebola. And people do not even know that they have the infection.

By the way: All four viruses bear peculiar and distinctive traces of being developed in laboratories, and seem like the verbal virus to be designed to poison their particular spheres. Just to mention this fact will cause the verbal virus to take effect immediately. If you are getting this information for the first time, it is advisable to seek information on just H1N1, where the laboratory eugenicists in the military segments of BigPharma screwed up and were unveiled. They contaminated the huge amount of vaccines, that they had stored long time before anyone heard of this socalled flue with ... the flue itself! If you study things like that because you are worried for you and your childrens health and life, you can be sure that you are called ... guess what?

The toxic, viral c-word is a piece of 'shut-up-candy'. Like any newspeak it can never be taken for its direct value. And now to poetry. The mindset behind the use of the c-word goes with the following monologue:

• What you say now irritates me.
  I do not know why, but it does.
• Well, now I know why, but I won't say.
• I used the word, and I had a real authority in the back.
  I can't remember which one ...
• I skip all substance and arguments, because it is too difficult - and tiring.
• OK, I'll say it: You make me feel guilty when you pose questions I can't answer - guilt is something that I am trying to get rid of.
• And you suggest that I haven't done my homework, which is a lie! ... But why would I want to do that? I have a TV.
• Since you now present something different from what we learned in school, it must therefore be You that is wrong. See, this is logic!
• I once heard this word on television, or where was it? Anyway: You are one of those con-whatever-theorists!
• I've had it, are you now questioning the word itself!? Do I have to understand and explain all words in order to use them?!
• We weren't suppose to think buttom-up. I said that the Russians and their president are bad people, because they are! So we are the good guys and they are the bad guys, and why? Because we were told, top-down! We don't have to think deeply about that and don't tell me about circular arguments! .. what is that anyway?
• You can poke your airy theories of Edward VII and an big conspiracy to start 1st World War up yours! It may well be that you can refer to a few thousand historical documents, but in my history book from first year high school it said, that it was all coincidence and that the Germans did it. And so do the guys in Oxford and Cambridge, and they are objective, for they were hired by the British Establishment with the serious task of writing war history, so they must know it.
• And the thing with Dresden and the allies exterminating 200.000 Germans civillians I don't give a shit about! They deserved to be fried.

The good news to all fellow conspiracy theorists of the world is, that every time the dragon spits venom in your face - be it from its own mouth or from all the automatons of the civilian world copy-pasting its venom - every time we are getting there, we are hitting the dragons nerves. It is almost a truth-o-meter.


Almost. There are in fact some crappy conspiracy theories out there floating around in the alternative communities. And some of them will have no doubt been implanted to create confusion and discreditability ('look what the fools have come up with'). Which only shows, that we need to metes: the truth-o-meter and the crap-o-meter.

Al den snak om konspirationsteori

Hvis vi vil vide noget, er vi nødt til at have en fornemmelse, en sansning, en genkendelse af mønstre, en mistanke. Når vi bliver klar over, hvad der skaber denne sansning og fornemmelse og disse mønstre, kalder vi det viden. 

Sagt på en mere akademisk måde:
Al sund vidensopsamling og -bearbejdelse – i sin rendyrkede form kaldet videnskab - har brug for i en vis fase at skabe teorier. Uden teorier, intet svar på noget spørgsmål. 

Tabuiseringen af teorifasen = vores sansninger, fornemmelser, mønstergenkendelser, mistanker -  er derfor sabotage af den kreative og spørgende fase i enhver sund vidensproces, hvorved egentlig viden udsættes og udebliver.

En teori er en trædesten på vejen, ikke den anden søbred. Hvis man ikke må træde nogen steder, er man dømt til at falde i vandet, medmindre man er Jesus.

Uden teorier, kvalificerede gætværk, midlertidige svar på spørgsmål, mellemlandinger og opsummeringer af opnået viden og resultater, der fås ved at sætte vidensdele sammen, hersker der et øde af kaos, dumhed og frygt. Den 'Mørke Middelsalder' var en periode, hvor dette øde herskede, for kirken havde monopoliseret viden og forhindret almindelige mennesker at få del i egentlig viden. Og ikke nok med det. De havde gjort det syndigt på egen hånd at skabe viden ved at stille de rette spørgsmål. Behøver vi at genfortælle, hvad de gjorde ved folk, der tænkte lidt for meget over tingene?

Begrebet 'konspirationsteori' og dets brug i offentlig diskurs er en tabuisering og nedgørelse af nysgerrighed, hæderlighed og spørgelyst og et anslag mod alle sunde vidensprocesser.

Sund teoridannelse må ikke indeholde for mange antagelser. Det svarer til for mange og for svage indicier i en juridisk bevisførelse. En nylig undersøgelse viste overraskende, at folk, der var flittige brugere af ordet 'konspirationsteori' gjorde mange antagelser, og at dem, de kaldte for 'konspirationsteoretikere' til gengæld stillede mange spørgsmål og gjorde færre antagelser.
 
Man skal nok være forsigtig med såkaldte undersøgelser, men det var dog alligevel sært. Og det svarer fuldstændig til, hvad man kan observere. 

Man kan fx. foretage sin egen stikprøve -test. Her er opskriften for dem, der har brug for den slags: Gør en måneds seriøs research om 'menneskeskabt global opvarmning', om den manglende videnskab bag, om svindlen i IPCC og East Anglia University, om hvad CO2 egentlig er og især: hvor enorme klimaforandringerne har været i Jordens historie. Fyr den så af i et lummert middagsselskab blandt akademiske æggehoder og politiske korrekte, især på venstrefløjen og insistér på at tale substans. Spørg fx. hvad de rent faktisk ved om CO2. Spørg dem om de ved, hvor meget CO2, der blot slap ud sidste gang vulkanen Hekla slog en prut, der stoppede flytrafikken i Europa i en uge. Spørg dem om det konkrete tal for, hvor meget CO2, der lagres i havene, i isen og i jorden og bed dem om at sammenligne med de mængder, som mennesker udslipper. Spørg dem om, hvorfor gartnere bruger CO2 i drivhusene, og om det er for at slå livet der ihjel. Spørg dem om den lille istid, spørg dem om solcykler, spørg dem, hvad det ville betyde for landmænd i Afrika, hvis CO2-indholdet blev fordoblet. Spørg dem om, hvor man milliarder, Al Gore og co har scoret på svindelnummeret. Fuldfør regnestykket for dem spredt over hele den kræftbyld, vi kan kalde klimaindustrien (humanister kan ikke regne...), spørg dem, hvad der blev af miljødebatterne og miljøbevægelserne, da hele klima-stuntet blev rullet ud. Spørg dem, spørg dem, spørg dem. Så skal du se dem diske op med antagelser i den helt store stil.

Frygten for konspirationen og den foreløbige viden, vi har om den, er som det mørke, religionerne skabte. Guds, den store auto-konspirators, veje er uransalige. Og skulle nogen dødelig = ansat i menneske-afdelingen af den kosmiske krop (korporationen) stille spørgsmålstegn ved, hvorvidt denne usurpatoriske gud, der har taget æren for Universets skabelse, er kompetent til jobbet baseret på selvsamme guds ret dårlige business-case, så falder der brænde ned fra himlen.

Hvis man fraregner den ondsindede intention, betyder 'at konspirere'blot 'at blive inspireret i hinandens selskab'. Men det vil være svært helt at barbere historiens mærkning bort fra ordet.

Verbal-historisk set betyder det snarere, at en gruppe bestående af ganske få personer i fora uden for de manges bevågenhed tager beslutninger om tiltag med afgørende konsekvenser for de mange, uden at spørge disse til råds. Disse tiltag har store, afgørende og langtrækkende konsekvenser for de mange. Giv mig et eksempel på en afgørende historisk hændelse, hvor dette ikke har været tilfældet!

Det modsatte af konspiration er enten 'ren tilfældighed'eller 'evolution'. Darwinismens hovedtese handler netop om tilfældighed og mutation som den styrende kraft i evolutionen = historiens gang. Den britiske og senere anglo-amerikanske elites videnskabelige underbygning - de bruger selv det ord-  af, hvorfor netop DE havde ret og pligt til at herske over andre mennesker i verden, kaldes darwinisme eller 'social-darwinisme', same-same.

Ikke overraskende kom begrebet 'konspirationsteori' netop fra en af den anglo-amerikanske / transatlantiske elites tænketanke, nærmere bestemt den paramilitære organisation ved navn The Rand Corporation. En ledende medarbejder herfra anbefalede efter Kennedymordet en CIA-direktør at svare på de ihærdige og nærgående spørgsmål, der ankom efter Warren-Kommisionens cover-up, ved simpelthen og uden at blinke: 'at benægte ALT og kalde alle spørgelystne borgere og journalister for konspirationsteoretikere'. Der var den minsandten igen: disse uansvarlige parasitter på den menneskelige kultur - en ældgammel gesjæft - er simpelthen bange for spørgsmål, og k-ordet er deres giftige forsvar mod spørgsmål - an-svar-lig-hed: evnen og viljen til at svare på spørgsmål, fx. 'Hvad har I gang i? Er det særlig godt for alle andre?

Janteloven og udsagn om konspirationsteori er synonyme. Det andet kan oversættes til det første:

• Du skal ikke tro, du kan danne overblik via teorier
• Du skal ikke tro, du kan stille spørgsmål
• Du skal ikke tro, du får svar ved at stille spørgsmål
• Du skal ikke tro, der findes svar på den slags spørgsmål
• Du skal ikke tro, du har lov til at spørge og teoretisere
• Du skal ikke tro, du har mulighed for at vide
• Du skal ikke tro, du har lov til at vide
• Du skal ikke tro, at der findes sammenhænge, for alt er tilfældigt 
• Du skal ikke tro, at du kan finde sammenhænge, der jo ikke findes
• Du skal ikke tro, at hvis du finder dem, at nogen vil høre på dig
  (og hvis de gør, har vi visse metoder ...)

Love er formuleret af magthavere. Det samme gælder janteloven og dens opdatering om konspirationsteorier. Skulle love og befalinger ikke udgå fra Kejser Augustus? Jo, men det skræmmende, ikke-menneskelige og virus-lignende ved dette ord er, at det kommer ud af munden på ikke-magtfulde folk og udåndes lige i ansigtet på andre ikke-magtfulde folk. Ordet har kontamineret tale-organet på ét menneske og smitter nu et andet menneske som AIDS, SARS, H1N1 eller Ebola. Og smittebæreren ved ikke selv, at vedkommende bærer smitten.

Alle fire vira bærer i øvrigt besynderlige og markante spor af at være udviklet i laboratorier, og synes ligesom den verbale virus at være designet til at forgifte deres særlige rum. Blot at nævne dette forhold vil bevirke, at den verbale virus straks træder i kraft. Hvis du på læsende tidspunkt ikke har hørt om den slags, så kan det anbefales at søge oplysninger om netop H1N1, hvor de selvsikre militære laboratorie-eugenikere, der kopulerede med BigPharma, dummede sig og blev afsløret. Og hvor de måtte hive i nødbremsen og aktive Plan B (hvad gør vi, hvis vi bliver afsløret...?). Så kan du være helt sikker på, at du bliver kaldt for ... gæt hvad?

Det toksiske, virale ord (og det var jo 'konspirationsteori', hvis ud har glemt det) er et 'hold-kæft-bolsje'. Som alle ordet i Ny-Sproget kan det aldrig tages for direkte pålydende.
Det kan oversættes til dansk som følger:

• Det, du siger nu, irriterer mig. Jeg ved ikke helt hvorfor, men det gør det altså.
• Jo, nu ved jeg det, men jeg siger det ikke.
• Jeg fyrer ordet af, som om jeg havde en ægte autoritet i ryggen. Jeg kan ikke lige huske, hvad den hed ...
• Jeg springer hele substans- og arguments-feltet over, for det er alt for besværligt - og jeg orker det heller ikke.
• Du giver mig dårlig samvittighed, når du spørger på den måde - samvittighed er noget, jeg i øvrigt prøver at slippe af med.
• Du antyder, at jeg ikke har gjort mit hjemmearbejde, det er fanderme for dårligt! … men hvorfor skulle jeg også det?
• Siden du nu siger noget andet end det, vi lærte i skolen, må det derfor være dig, der er gal på den. Lyder det ikke vældigt sundt og logisk?
• Jeg hørte en gang det her ord i fjernsynet, eller hvor var det lige, som jeg ikke kan huske? Nå-men: det er i hvert fald sådan én, du er!
• Nej nu stopper vi: begynder du også at stille spørgsmål ved ordet!? Kan man nu ikke længere fyre ord af, som man ikke kan gøre rede for?!
• Du skal ikke komme her og ødelægge den gode stemning. Det var jo ikke meningen, at vi skulle tænke. Jeg sagde jo bare, at russerne og deres præsident er onde mennesker, for det ved vi jo! Altså vi er de gode og de er de onde, og så skal du ikke komme her og snakke om cirkulære argumenter … !
• Du kan stikke dine luftige teorier om Edward VII og en omfattende konspiration om at starte og gennemføre 1. Verdenskrig op i røven! Det kan godt være, at du kan referere til et par tusinde historiske dokumenter, men i min historiebog fra 1. G stod der altså, at det hele var tilfældigheder. Og det siger de også i Oxford og Cambridge, og de er objektive, for de er ejet af det Britiske Establishment og fik det ærefulde hverv at skrive krigshistorie, så de må jo vide det.
  Og det dér med Dresden gider jeg overhovedet ikke at høre om !!

Den gode nyhed for alle med-konspirationsteoretikere er, at hver gang gang Dragen spytter gift i vores ansigter - det være sig fra egen mund eller fra alle de automatoner i den civile verden, der har indoptaget dens gift - så er det fordi tampen brænder, så er det, fordi vi har ramt dens nerver. Det er en slags sandheds-indikator.

En slags. For der flyder virkelig konspirationsteorier af ringe substans rundt i de alternative netværk, hvoraf de fleste af dem uden tvivl er implanteret for at skabe forvirring og diskredibilitet ('se bare, hvad tåberne nu er kommet op med ..'). Det viser os bare nødvendigheden af at bruge sandhedsindikatoren og kritisk tænkning i begge retninger.