Warring World(s) Part 1. Introduction to the Enemy

Seeing that there isn't a whole lot going on here at the moment, I thought I'd take the opportunity to write some more on things not covered in my previous essay. I'll do it in parts.

(Or as the Rolling Stones would have it, “Pleased to meet you. Hope you guess my name”!

It has been said that all wars throughout history are waged by the elite against the ordinary citizen. It may appear that it is one nation against another and that is the sum total of it. But the wars are always started and supported by the elite on both sides and are paid for by the citizenry on both sides (whom have no argument with each other) in lives, health, housing , infrastructure and taxes. Let us not forget the taxes. They pay the armaments and equipment manufacturers for their deadly production that is then totally destroyed and taking with it the wealth accumulated from previous years production. All wasted. Jobs in the Military/Industrial Complex are jobs creating poverty. Fully half of the worlds scientists and 90% of the worlds physicists work directly or indirectly for war, for violence, for destruction. Unbelievable! Think of the problems that could be solved if all this effort were to be redirected.

And then there are the bankers who finance this carnage and destruction. The same people win no matter who “wins” and who “loses” because waging war is profitable. While ever a nation has privately owned banks and privatley owned for profit armaments manufacturers, it will have wars. No question about it.

These same war manufacturers have taken over the government. They have the money and they have a need. They need to orient the economy and the education system towards war (I doubt there's a university in America that doesn't get a grant from the Dept of Defence, for instance, and there isn't a State or Congressional electorate in the United States that doesn't have a “Defence” industry). For all the details, history and likely future see this article from researcher Brian Bogart
They also need a front to hide behind because the average citizen, though very imperfect morally, is not committed to doing evil as the war manufacturers are and so would reject them if they knew this agenda of destruction; this agenda of violence. Most people are committed to creation though they may not consciously realise it or express it that way.

So this is how the lines are drawn; the overwelming majority committed to creative endeavours and the minority to destructive ones. Another way to describe this is the basically good versus the decidedly evil. Or, the people versus the psychopaths.

The psychopaths cannot profit from destruction if there first isn't wealth creation. Creation doesn't need destruction but destruction needs creation. One can exist by itself, the other cannot. Destruction is parasitical and therefore the destroyers, the violent, are parasites. We have seen these parasites deceive with every move they make, lie with every word they utter. They are committed to war with us, to our destruction. If these destroyers worship a god or are acting on behalf of a god, then this god must also be a parasitical god (which is an oxymoron) and dependent on a creative God. They cannot be the same God, or parts of the same God, because God cannot be at war with itself. It cannot have two natures and not be two Gods. And if this is so then only one is sustainable, the other is not. They are far from equal and only one can be God. So if you want to devote yourself to the cause of destruction or violence, then you are also commiting yourself to destruction. You are following a Being (or behaviour, at least) that calls for your destruction, too. How dumb is that? How insane is that? This is the reality of violence.

A real world example of this nonsense is the theology of Freemasonry. In the lower rungs (or initiations, as they call them) the fledgling Mason is led to believe that the God they worship is the Christian God, Jesus. Further up they are told that there are two gods, Jesus and Lucifer, Light and Dark. This is otherwise know as Dualism. Then finally Lucifer is presented as transcendent. Of course, by changing the theology so dramaticaly they are telling the neophyte that they have lied to him along the way. Why does he now continue to follow people who lie to him? More on this later.

Whether you, the reader, believe in a personalised Evil Being and/or God or not, I don't think it matters to the reasoning and logic of my essay. The opposing spiritual forces represent opposing principles and we follow one or the other, by and large, whether we like it or not. Either way, I find this “cosmic” overview very helpful in sorting out the cacophany of confusing voices and problems in the world which is the subject of the next part. Perhaps this apocalyptic approach (Good Vs Evil) is my way of going to the “source” and working my way back from there. Whatever, thanks for reading this far. Comments and feedback welcomed.

Next part here


McJ's picture

Another great essay James.

Another great essay James. Thanks for posting it.

"The psychopaths cannot profit from destruction if there first isn't wealth creation. Creation doesn't need destruction but destruction needs creation. One can exist by itself, the other cannot. Destruction is parasitical and therefore the destroyers, the violent, are parasites."

I like the analogy. The destructors/psychopaths produce nothing that is of any use to anyone living on this planet. Worse yet, when you begin to study the real history of the world it becomes evident that their appetite for pain and suffering is insatiable. It's a downward spiral, the more money and power they have, the more destructing they can do forcing the rest of us to labor and pay for the reconstruction which enriches them even more and on and on. Left unchecked, they will cause their own demise when they finally destroy their host (us).

Here's an example of this circular insanity in action (as if we need more!). Clinton is expected to announce a $900 million aid package for the reconstruction of Gaza at a donor conference in Egypt next week. So, the US taxpayer just paid untold hundreds of millions of dollars to have Israel destroy Gaza and now they are going to pay to reconstruct it. Then Israel can go blow it up again.

"The most unpleasant truth in the long run is a far safer travelling companion than the most agreeable falsehood." Emerson

Yeah, it'd be funny if it

Yeah, it'd be funny if it wasn't so bloody tragic. Of course, I don't expect the Gazans will see much of it given that genocide is the overiding objective.

McJ's picture

more money...

You are right about that. I wonder who will be controlling all that cash? wink

And flushing even more billions down the drain it's the US taxpayer again...


Middle East Security Assistance:
$2.4 billion for Israel (not including $170 million in emergency appropriations) fulfilling the 10-year Memorandum of Understanding between the United States and Israel, $1.5 billion in economic and security assistance for Egypt, and $498.5 million in economic and security assistance for Jordan.

"The most unpleasant truth in the long run is a far safer travelling companion than the most agreeable falsehood." Emerson

I thought you would

I thought you would appreciate this, McJ
Why am I not surprised?

McJ's picture

Thanks James

"$200 million to help the Palestinian Authority meet its budget; $400 million for the authority's programs to improve governance, security and economic development"

In other words, a massive hand out to the psychopaths in charge - perfect! As you said before "it would be funny if wasn't so bloody tragic".

From Fritz Edlinger, the Secretary General of the "Society for Austro-Arab Relations" in Vienna:

"Now the game of the Israelis and Americans is to split Palestinians, to divide them ... So the Israelis define it like that, we have good guys in Ramallah who accept our domination, and the bad guys sitting in Gaza and in prison and wherever, who are not ready to accept unjust and in principle unfair attitudes of negotiation. This is the problem, and this is the background for all the boycotts and sanctions against Gaza, because they want to demonstrate "we will fight you till the end and if you don’t give in you will be physically eliminated"."

"...the problem is the bad people of Fatah, they are already bad for the policy, and they do the job for the Israelis...[This] is something else where the PA Fatah fell into the Israeli trap. There is one who is responsible for this policy of Fatah, this is Mohammad Dahlan."

"If there is any future for Fatah, they must eliminate these people, who are in fact traitors. These traitors are paid by the Israelis and the Americans to do bad things, the most callous jobs. And this is something: if these people are still present in any position in Fatah, even after the so-called next congress of Fatah, then forget about Fatah."

A bit OT but did you catch the coverage on John Kerry's visit to Gaza?

Standing among some of rubble in Gaza Shar Habeel al-Zaim, a palestinian lawyer said to him, “We highly appreciate your visit here and hope you can talk to your colleagues and say that we want peace with Israel. But we also need to live respectable lives.”

This was Kerry's response (which was a non-response and an opportunity for him to lecture the guy and get in a sound bite), "Your political leadership needs to understand that any nation that has rockets hitting it for many years threatening its residents is going to respond. [Hamas] needs to make it clear how it is willing to move to make peace and those decisions have not been made yet.”

I can't find the expanded clip with that shows the lawyer asking the question but you can watch Kerry's immediate response at the link below. http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/middle_east/7898801.stm

It really struck me as the response of a psychopath (and I don't know if he is) considering where he was, what he was seeing and the content of Shar Habeel al-Zaim's comment. It was as much in the condescending way he delivers it and how he cuts the guy off from any retort and gets back in his armed motorcade (which I don't think the above clip shows but you'll get the idea) as in what he says.

btw- great work on the essays, I'm looking forward to more!

"The most unpleasant truth in the long run is a far safer travelling companion than the most agreeable falsehood." Emerson

Great writing, as always.

Great writing, as always. Thanks.
I find it all but impossible to put myself in the psychopaths shoes. Am I losing my empathy?


No, you're not losing your empathy, Debbieanne. It is because you have empathy that you cannot put yourself in the shoes of (empathise with) someone without empathy. I know it sounds a little circular but that's the nub of it. One of the main reasons these psychopaths get away with as much as they do is because ordinary people cannot contemplate that a person without ethics, scrupples or conscience could exist let alone be highly functioning. It is one of our biggest problems.
I'll be writing more on psychopathy. If you haven't read this yet, it will give you a better idea. Oh, and thanks!

Post new comment

The content of this field is kept private and will not be shown publicly.
By submitting this form, you accept the Mollom privacy policy.