Perhaps we should get into why the false dichotomies are so effective.
False dichotomies have been taught to us since an early age - be it in the form of fairy tales or religious textbooks. The eternal battle between good and evil.
All of these devices also taught the mind the concept of hopium - that there is the good side and it is fighting on our behalf. When you have 2 sides 'fighting', we immediately assume that surely one of the sides represents the good, especially if there are no other entities visible on the world stage or on our TVs. The idea that neither of the 2 visible entities is good would require one to embrace the black pill moment, and most human beings are completely unable to enter that dark world of pessimism and the realization that there are no good guys at the top.
It also doesn't help the matters that we have brainwashing devices operating 24/7 in the form of TVs, smartphones, social media, etc.
You may find the film 'they live' interesting, because it specifically talks about the cabal without ever saying so out in the open. It also talks about human psychology and how human beings are being manipulated. In one scene, they talk about the subjugation of humanity being complete in the year 2025.
The start of the rebellion is triggered only in the end of that film, when the brainwashing devices are shut down. I suspect that in our reality, the real rebellion can also be triggered only once the brainwashing devices are shut down - recruiting people to our side, while these devices are still operating will be incredibly difficult.
I could add a few more points regarding false dichotomies. The vast majority fall into this mental trap out of infantilism, following the logic found in fairy tales, cartoons, and movies about "good guys" and "bad guys." The very system of mass, multi-party, electoral democracy relies on dividing the masses into two warring camps. The plutocracy that invented and imposed the system of representative democracy manages both camps masterfully, enforcing the same policies upon them. The same scheme has been applied on a global scale: East vs. West, the collective West vs. Russia/China/BRICS. I understand that the average person is not privy to all the secrets behind these strategies; however, when I see a persistent effort within the dissident camp to push a false narrative—portraying Russia, Putin, and Xi’s China as a positive alternative—I am left with no choice but to categorize these intellectuals into two groups: useful idiots (who still do not grasp what is happening) and mercenaries (who lie for money).
Yes, as I have written in my text for Chisinau 2023:
It is refreshing to see some of our distinct colleagues exposing the threat of globalism spreading through the Multipolarity concept. What we really need is active international peaceful cooperation of sovereign national states serving their citizens.
O que noto como curioso é que esses anti globalistas, como o senhor Dugin enquanto uma âncora proeminente desse movimento, jamais são descentralizadores. Eu creio, defendo e luto pelo direito de autodeterminação dos povos como a arma jurídica mais relevante para esse processo. A Rússia jamais poderá ser um polo anti globalista, pois ela é, por essência, um país globalista. A Rússia é um império e, portanto, carrega o espírito de expansão política em si. Quem defende o direito de autodeterminação dos povos dificilmente irá apoiar impérios, antes apoiar separatismos e pequenos países, pequenas nações. O Brasil, por exemplo, é ainda um império, que mantém cativo várias nações internas, como São Paulo, o Sul, a Amazônia, o Estado do Espírito Santo, a Bahia, etc. A UNPO é mais anti globalista, na prática, do que o senhor Dugin e sua máfia de agentes do eixo do Kremlin.
Ok, Mr. Rosca, now that this series has developed somewhat, I can’t help but to ask you.
As much as one likes to admire Dostoevsky‘s maturation into a faithfulness regarding his nation’s people and its traditional governance, he came to this precisely through a recognition of a faith in the orthodoxy of the heart of the Russian people of his time.
I am a relatively young American born in old conquered Mexican territory in the age of AI virtual reality and alien disclosure.
I love my compatriots, but this nation is not an orthodox land. Our orthodox churches here are rather like tiny outposts.
Not that you’re saying this—but I think it sadly laughable to try to make an equation between Dostoevsky’s late monarchism and today’s situation in the U.S.A. Whenever I hear my orthodox coreligionists speaking “optimistically” about the “baptism of the United States,” or offering orthodox soteriology as a panacea for the American political crisis, I can’t help but find these people very naive. The monarchists of today’s USA are the ideologues behind the technocrats who want CEO-Kings to rule over a fragmentary underclass.
I believe orthodox Christianity contains the solution, but just that it’s “answers” so to speak don’t equate merely to a resolution of the mounting secular problem.
It seems to me that Christian salvation proper has always been a personal reality, and that what plays out on the world-historical scale is a matter of aggregated wills.
What do you think? What is the correct place of political questions in the life of an ardent orthodox believer in today’s world?
Is there room for an actual reversion to “pre-Enlightenment” Christian concepts of governance? Or isn’t the “cat out of the bag”?
Thanks for your comment. No, it is to late. The World is poisoned irrémédiably by Satan and we cannot come back for “golden age”. There is not political solutions for current crisis. Only personal path.
Perhaps we should get into why the false dichotomies are so effective.
False dichotomies have been taught to us since an early age - be it in the form of fairy tales or religious textbooks. The eternal battle between good and evil.
All of these devices also taught the mind the concept of hopium - that there is the good side and it is fighting on our behalf. When you have 2 sides 'fighting', we immediately assume that surely one of the sides represents the good, especially if there are no other entities visible on the world stage or on our TVs. The idea that neither of the 2 visible entities is good would require one to embrace the black pill moment, and most human beings are completely unable to enter that dark world of pessimism and the realization that there are no good guys at the top.
It also doesn't help the matters that we have brainwashing devices operating 24/7 in the form of TVs, smartphones, social media, etc.
You may find the film 'they live' interesting, because it specifically talks about the cabal without ever saying so out in the open. It also talks about human psychology and how human beings are being manipulated. In one scene, they talk about the subjugation of humanity being complete in the year 2025.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=dshTKSFaIYY
The start of the rebellion is triggered only in the end of that film, when the brainwashing devices are shut down. I suspect that in our reality, the real rebellion can also be triggered only once the brainwashing devices are shut down - recruiting people to our side, while these devices are still operating will be incredibly difficult.
I could add a few more points regarding false dichotomies. The vast majority fall into this mental trap out of infantilism, following the logic found in fairy tales, cartoons, and movies about "good guys" and "bad guys." The very system of mass, multi-party, electoral democracy relies on dividing the masses into two warring camps. The plutocracy that invented and imposed the system of representative democracy manages both camps masterfully, enforcing the same policies upon them. The same scheme has been applied on a global scale: East vs. West, the collective West vs. Russia/China/BRICS. I understand that the average person is not privy to all the secrets behind these strategies; however, when I see a persistent effort within the dissident camp to push a false narrative—portraying Russia, Putin, and Xi’s China as a positive alternative—I am left with no choice but to categorize these intellectuals into two groups: useful idiots (who still do not grasp what is happening) and mercenaries (who lie for money).
Yes, as I have written in my text for Chisinau 2023:
It is refreshing to see some of our distinct colleagues exposing the threat of globalism spreading through the Multipolarity concept. What we really need is active international peaceful cooperation of sovereign national states serving their citizens.
Thanks Yuri, keep on the good work.
the people chose money and status before truth. they know, but the champagne tast to good to replace it with water.
the deniers(putin club) act like alcaholics.. the vodka make them forget the problems.. better drunk than sober.
the same i think of the normis. they refuse to investegate and think, better with MSM news.
only a large personal cost will force them to see..
O que noto como curioso é que esses anti globalistas, como o senhor Dugin enquanto uma âncora proeminente desse movimento, jamais são descentralizadores. Eu creio, defendo e luto pelo direito de autodeterminação dos povos como a arma jurídica mais relevante para esse processo. A Rússia jamais poderá ser um polo anti globalista, pois ela é, por essência, um país globalista. A Rússia é um império e, portanto, carrega o espírito de expansão política em si. Quem defende o direito de autodeterminação dos povos dificilmente irá apoiar impérios, antes apoiar separatismos e pequenos países, pequenas nações. O Brasil, por exemplo, é ainda um império, que mantém cativo várias nações internas, como São Paulo, o Sul, a Amazônia, o Estado do Espírito Santo, a Bahia, etc. A UNPO é mais anti globalista, na prática, do que o senhor Dugin e sua máfia de agentes do eixo do Kremlin.
Ok, Mr. Rosca, now that this series has developed somewhat, I can’t help but to ask you.
As much as one likes to admire Dostoevsky‘s maturation into a faithfulness regarding his nation’s people and its traditional governance, he came to this precisely through a recognition of a faith in the orthodoxy of the heart of the Russian people of his time.
I am a relatively young American born in old conquered Mexican territory in the age of AI virtual reality and alien disclosure.
I love my compatriots, but this nation is not an orthodox land. Our orthodox churches here are rather like tiny outposts.
Not that you’re saying this—but I think it sadly laughable to try to make an equation between Dostoevsky’s late monarchism and today’s situation in the U.S.A. Whenever I hear my orthodox coreligionists speaking “optimistically” about the “baptism of the United States,” or offering orthodox soteriology as a panacea for the American political crisis, I can’t help but find these people very naive. The monarchists of today’s USA are the ideologues behind the technocrats who want CEO-Kings to rule over a fragmentary underclass.
I believe orthodox Christianity contains the solution, but just that it’s “answers” so to speak don’t equate merely to a resolution of the mounting secular problem.
It seems to me that Christian salvation proper has always been a personal reality, and that what plays out on the world-historical scale is a matter of aggregated wills.
What do you think? What is the correct place of political questions in the life of an ardent orthodox believer in today’s world?
Is there room for an actual reversion to “pre-Enlightenment” Christian concepts of governance? Or isn’t the “cat out of the bag”?
Thanks for your comment. No, it is to late. The World is poisoned irrémédiably by Satan and we cannot come back for “golden age”. There is not political solutions for current crisis. Only personal path.
I agree. God bless your path Sir
Thank you. You too.