So rich people own everything and you misconstrue freedumb for the choice between engineered options.

Day in and day out. Until you are dead.

As I descend into the lonely uncharted territory self-reflection brings I need to constantly remind myself why I felt so compelled to initially indulge in this journey. When a person begins “waking up” they first realize the “reality” which knits what they have grown to critic and resolve with idealistic hollywood viewpoint is in fact a cold, harsh and existentially bound series of ideas and institutions headed by ruthless power hungry individuals you were told your whole life were your friends. When you begin this quest you may start by expressing your anger and dislike of the many unjust practices which require human suffering for their existence. You may want to “feed the starving people” and that in itself is enough (in your eyes) to devote your time and make sacrifices for a cause greater then yourself. Then you probe deeper and deeper still, you realize that it is not so simple as “the corporations vs humans”, you realize that you have been indoctrinated with a status quo affirming education and that your lexicon for challenging this oppression was developed there as well (Orwellian literature). You realize that the motive to “feed the starving children” will not suffice in motivating the brainwashed selfish masses to take the necessary action to dismantle the web of lies they have assembled and become dependent upon. You realize that these people have been trained to ingest information in a certain way, and that any enlightening must utilize (somehow) these neural conduits hollowed by mindfuk incorporated in order to communicate with them. Essentially, you have to dumb it down. 

So What the fuck am I trying to say?  

The more committed to fadsmashers I become the more its meaning becomes dissolved, I see myself doing it out of obligation more so then necessity (EVEN THOUGH ITS MORE NECESSARY NOW THEN EVER!!!), as is the natural progression of any artistic endeavor goes that gains an audience with demands, expectations and the need for some consistent approach. It’s like saying the same word over and over again until it loses all meaning. When it does lose meaning (for me), I feel compelled to transcend my old thinking and establish a new one that is more refined and concise. The problem is you end up straying so far from the shore that no one understands what the fuck you are talking about eventually. I seriously am skeptical of anyone who constantly touts the same old lines, posts the same old shit, for years on end, and doesn’t show any signs of an evolving opinion; those who seem to have become concretized in their ideology simply stopped thinking.

It’s not how long one has studied sociopolitics that is important; it’s how fast they progress through the stages.  I could easily keep my media within the confines of what is comprehensible by the people I am trying to enlighten, but I would not be being true to pursuit of virtue, justice, and honesty. This entails when we have it figured out, that we step back. For example: Just because Zionist influence (namely those of Jewish descent) seem to have every oppressive industry on lock down, it’s not enough to simply call these people out, as there is an agenda that is equally sinister that awaits taking its place, and will leech the efforts of anyone trying to do this towards its own ends. My critic of Zionism, is not an endorsement either directly and or indirectly for these halfwit trigger happy self-serving types who simply don’t trust the government and want to replace the ziosphere with their primitive ideology which ultimately only serves the needs of the wealthy capitalists assholes who fund the shock media that gets them in a economically viable scurry. Fadsmashers is more ethically and philosophically refined then that, in that we are honest and do not selectively bullshit ourselves whenever there is a pitfall to our ideology (which should be evolving). I also won’t say “fuck it” and won’t revert to nihilism or true cynicism (which entails not thinking you can change anything).

As a sidenote this is my declaration that I will never do "crazy shit", and if they say I did, they are full of shit.

I honestly and sincerely would like to make the world a better place to waste, I have no grande vision for how it should be (although I am working on it), and no ulterior motive asides from smashing and humiliating bullshit liars, their ideas and their lifestyles, humiliating the unquestioned lives of moral morons who are simply lead by the nose to any cause that seems worthy of a fight because they are bored out of their fucking minds, want some kind of moral balancing for being complicit. I have given up arguing with shitbrained selfish fox news viewers, instead I focus on those who watch Olbermann, and John Stewart because they mean well, but are as still brainwashed and complicit as the faux newstards they make a culture of criticizing. I honestly want an end to unjust human suffering, this requires that I teach people how to think critically, not teach them what to think.

If you still think its "all crazy conspiracy theories and stuffs" you are a brainwashed idiot who deserves it. You really do. I have no aspiration to save you.

I challenge you to think, and keep thinking, I challenge you to walk alone and really see it. If everyone is waving their fist at you, even your friends, then you are onto something DEEP. If not, you aint saying shit. Tragic indeed. But hip. Fucking hip.


3 Comments
 
 

Darwin has been receiving an increased amount of attention as of late,  largely due to the 'transition' away from the bat fucking crazy religious fundamentalism that underscored the Bush puppacy, but mainly because it’s the scientists 200th birthday. A new study (that was likely poorly executed) released last week showed that only 4 out of 10 Americans endorse the theory of evolution, that is to say, only 4 of 10 believe that they are currently evolving. So right yet so wrong... The study found that those who were more educated by the academic industry were less likely to believe that they were created in one day. Whereas those in the lower IQ range (60%???) are quite content believing things that are about as plausible as their secular nemesis ‘Santa Claus’ (the latter of course being only for children… right)
http://firstread.msnbc.msn.com/archive/2009/02/12/1791814.aspx

Another article entitled 'Darwins theory motivated by a hatred of slavery' only somewhat backfired when his theory was revised in Francis Galton's ideas of eugenics that sought to craft a society of uber conformist consumers! Clearly the campaign hasn't worked! Really though, lets get real... just like notions that the civil war was fought over slavery, this one too requires we swallow the predominately liberal idea of virtuous government.

http://www.newscientist.com/article/dn16503-hatred-of-slavery-drove-darwin-to-emancipate-all-life.html

The media is aiding the Vatican in conscripting new members by publicizing the institutions recognition of Darwinism, knitting the values of religion with that of secularism, as the Vatican has concurrently tried to modernize its image in stride, by first forgiving John Lennon for saying his band was “bigger then Jesus”, and now welcoming the integration of Darwin’s theories into their oppressive social control apparatus. In the end this more sophisticated form of religious manipulation will be used as evidence to show just how far reaching and effective the Obamanoid calls for change have been; which of course will all be double edged bullshit... I digress...

The Vatican has also recognized the theory of evolution as compatible with its long since discredited moral arbitration, but not because the theory of evolution has no bearing on religious rhetorical explanations of the creation of life (as the essential scientific debate is between theologians and cosmologists and not evolutionary biologists), but because the idea was traced back to someone who was recorded as being a saint (Thomas Aquinas), by the same people who use to sell indulgences (salvation) for the sake of accumulating the worldly possessions they criticized! Because something is only true if someone in this book says it was. Sure I can settle on that!

HERE IS WHY THIS IS A POINTLESS FUCKING DEBATE:
The onset of life and the onset of the universe are two different things; within our current temporal understanding of causation (past-present-future) one of these things CLEARLY precedes the other (although there to some more obscure phenomenological explanations that explain consciousness as preceding matter; ideas which of course are non verifiable). Fundamentally however, and based on what we objectively know, explaining the origins of life (how organic compounds come into being) Doesn't explain the origins of the universe (how something came out of nothing); at least not directly. Thus, this whole debate between biologists and theologians is just another in a string of distracting debates put there to polarize the population along dimensions which have no significance to the fact that they exist as prisoners in a privatized panopticon. And lest we forget the atheists who tout a similar ignorance in their thinking that in refuting creationists claims to the origin of life that they will prove nothing more than themselves exists outside the thin strip of electromagnetic spectrum their eyes are privy too witnessing. In short, this is a go nowhere debate, which is exactly the kind of debate people making real decisions want the fad-ulous populous concerning themselves with while they protect their desire to fuck you over with incentives and bonuses which contrary to popular belief, Obama doesn’t plan on retracting!!!

I digress...

Anyway... the article continues to say that the Vatican does not endorse the theory of intelligent design, and believed it to be more of a cultural phenomenon, perhaps only targeted toward halfwit retards whose conception of their own being doesn’t extend beyond fears of being prodded by some pansy in red leotards and a pitchfork for eternity... who was of course, made in gods image?!?
http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/newstopics/religion/4588289/The-Vatican-claims-Darwins-theory-of-evolution-is-compatible-with-Christianity.html

Could this resurgent interest in Darwinism actually have the effect of strengthening the mental and spiritual oppression of the institution of christianity? Its likely that the theory of evolution will be integrated into the fundamentalist christian understanding, and not married or knit together as conservative media is suggesting. In these dire times of fake economic collapse, when everyone seeks out an explanation as to why their unnecessary shit from useless countries costs a few dollars more, rather then a seeking to overthrow the powers that be, people prefer to sponge for reformed versions of traditionalist explanations of how everything is justified and that "you cant always get what you want but if you try sometimes you get what you need" because only those not bound by this delusion have the right to fuck you over and "get what they want"!! Forget exchanging our hardline literal interpretation of the bible that resembles fairy tales we tell our children, for a morality that is based in reason, or lets use the resurgence in secularism as another excuse to... keep being complacent shopaholics whose role is to not think between punching their time card and wasting time in church!

Also See: Pope pleads Slaves to Not Rebel

Add Comment