"National Debt" is a Lie, Framed within a Misdirection, on a Plate of Deception, Garnished with Many Fallacies and Confusions

Why are we still having this discussion about "national debt"? Decades ago I was able to research this issue and found that issue of debt is artificially constructed~ That says a lot about the people who still haven't understood this.  In fact, it is obvious.  So why don't people understand the obvious?

Here and here are a couple of things to consider in this matter which reveal how important it is, because the matter of costs and debts are not a minor theme in large scale, and very perilous sorts of enterprises in your world today.

What is "debt"?  I'm not going to break out the dictionary.  But "debt" refers to the consideration which is prospectively extended to a person due to their granting something as collateral.  It is VERY simple if you understand the words in that sentence.  It isn't more complicated than that.  If someone thinks it is, they are simply deluded. That is all debt is, all it ever was, and all it ever can be.  It is just what I said here:  "The consideration which is prospectively extended to a person due to their granting something as collateral."
That's it. I'll allow it to be said that this is my proposed definition, but in fact it is the proper meaning of the term.  This is what I say "a priori"  Shall we test it with the evidence?

Wikipedia:

A debt generally refers to something owed by one party, the borrower or debtor, to a second party, the lender or creditor. The lender or creditor can be a bank, credit cardcompany, payday loan provider, or an individual. One country can also lend money to another country. Debt is generally subject to contractual terms regarding the amount and timing of repayments of principal and interest.[1] The term can also be used metaphoricallyto cover moral obligations and other interactions not based on economic value.[2] For example, in Western cultures, a person who has been helped by a second person is sometimes said to owe a "debt of gratitude" to the second person.

Google:

Collins English Dictionary (online) :

debt (dɛt )

Definitions
nounsomething that is owed, such as money, goods, or services
See bad debtan obligation to pay or perform something; liabilitythe state of owing something, esp money, or of being under an obligation (esp in the phrases in debt, in (someone's) debt)a temporary failure to maintain the necessary supply of something ⇒ ■ sleep debt, ⇒ ■ oxygen debt
Derived Forms ˈdebtless adjective
Word OriginC13: from Old French dette, from Latin dēbitum, from dēbēre to owe, from de- + habēre to have; English spelling influenced by the Latin etymon
SynonymsView thesaurus entry= debit, bill, score, account, due, duty, commitment, obligation, liability, arrears, money owing
= indebtedness,= indebtedness, obligation

It is part of the meaning, or rather derived from the meaning of Justice itself!  This for that! Quid pro quo! It is of the essence of social bonds, where people demonstrate consideration for one another as fellow beings. 

There is no economic modality of this unless there is first a psychological mode.  First people have to understand, have to be able to consider, one another's interests, and of course each must understand his own.  That is not possible the other way around.  It cannot be first some arbitrary economic activity, and slowly people started to add, over time, a psychological motivation and cognition to such things!  That's silly!

So we know that how to understand interests and obligations is a simple matter that is made complicated only be circumstances, but still yet remains the same in essence.  A simple computer is a complicated computer is a computer.

Debt is consideration by a person extended to a person due to their granting of something in collateral.  Yes yes, I know that collateral isn't used that way by most.  They don't understand the nature of debt in a clear way. 

What is primary is the expected return. Someone who has an interest in what they already have, does not want to merely lose it.  But for some reason they expect to get something in return for having it, which is almost by definition a "burden" of some kind. The want to offset the burden of their encumbering possession with an interest.  No point in carrying around an ax all day if you aren't likely to have use for it.  No point in doing truly useless things.  Even doing nothing is good in its proper context, as it isn't really "nothing", but is resting, or thinking, or reminiscing, or sleeping, or breathing/recovering breath, or some other such thing.  There is "no nothing".

So we see that there are pros and cons to all things which we evaluate in this way.  It offers us something up front (the collateral), but what it offers us comes with its own costs. Those are the "interests" of the collateral. Those interests incur debt. The debt must be paid. That is the Law.

Collateral is used to mean something put on the table as offered in case of default.  It is an offer of something that holds value for the lender though he'd rather have the agreed form of payment, but this is offered mainly as evidence that there is something to back up the agreement which will not leave the lender just hanging with nothing.  It shows good faith, that is its original meaning. It might even be worth more than the intended payment by the agreement.

But that's some weird sort of conceptual footbinding to use words that way, because it doesn't allow the language to express the heart of the matter in a way that is economical to its full meaning, and so this word's use will simply have to be repurposed, whether people like it or not. I don't owe them their preferred use, and they don't owe me any of their attention, and that's fine with me. My purpose is to understand the matter as it really is, not make pretentious people feel better about the sorry state of their knowledge, feelings about which are hurt merely because nomenclature wasn't nailed down they way they wanted it to be, however inane their paradigmatic "floor plan"!


Collateral means:

2.  Something pledged as security for repayment of a loan, to be forfeited in the event of a default.

That can be true.  Or it can mean what I mean when I say it is

1. Something that is pledged by a person on his own calculated expectation of a return, which he thinks is secured by that collateral.

It goes in the reverse direction as I use it, because collateral is not the main thing.  The main thing isn't the loan, but the DEBT.  Why? Everyone knows this is true!! That's the status quo, since legally and ethically society considers that the debt incurred is the main thing, it is the thing people are rather contentious about, by far more so than anything else in the matter when there is a default, and so the issue of debt is primary, and the loan is itself collateral offered to justify that debt.  Further, my definition captures the specious meaning of the common use of the term.  What is the "collateral" they are talking about except something pledged because he calculates that the endebtor will go through with the loan with that collateral added as consideration.  That IS collateral, but it isn't the case that collateral is only that.  A tool is a tool is a tool.  Collateral is collateral is collateral.  It is something pledged as consideration for the calculated return (the interest) of securing the loan. But that's all the "principle" is.  It is offered as collateral (it is secondary to the interests of the endebtor, clearly, or it wouldn't be used in this way but some other way) so as to secure some interest beyond itself.  That is literally what "principle + interest" amounts to.  Beyond the issue of whether or how that can be right or wrongly done, that is simply what it is.

What is the main thing for the "debtor"?  That's also not the loan, not the collateral the "endebtor" grants him, but rather his own interest in what that collateral helps him to attain. It might be that with just some little sum he could produce an invention worth far more than that little sum. See now why I put collateral, the "secondary thing" in its proper place?

Ponder these things, because they are rarely pondered, but they are VERY important. I say this because for decades the world has been practically, and openly mute about these things, and I'm just getting started flaying their bullshit version of events so as to expose the Truth about economic "reality", among all other aspects of "reality". In the next article I'll take this "lexicon for discussion" through some rather illuminating paces. There is a very mechanical, logical, specific, and paradigm-critical reason for my choosing to rearrange the use of terms in this way. It is really just a fine tuning of the use of the term so that it does double duty.  It will soon be extended to include the term "debt", "interest", "principle", and then considerations will proceed to many other economic matters which would be better resolved after this long-lived Methuselah of fraud, this fundamental misunderstanding and miscomprehension of debt, is finally brought to the justice of conceptual analysis.

The Vertiginous Nausea of the Ugly Truth: The Unveiling of the REAL "KEY SECRET" of the World

Is this guy really a TOP ANALYST if he can't face the forces truly at play in the world? He seems to think so. I say he's pushing a paper tiger narrative, and utterly ignoring the real tiger "hiding in plain sight".

And so is Governor Abbot a good guy? The bottleneck is just having a ditzy intern? This is possibly a real bottleneck, and Governor Abbot may be a good guy (?), but in either case, that bottleneck is really severe if it can magically block not only good, big ideas from reaching these guys' ears, but somehow block logic and fact and conscience from coexisting in their minds simultaneously. They may have any two, but not all three.
They remind me of the god which apparently crafted them. Powerful? Wise (cunning)? Good? Any two, but not all three. Or else evil doesn't exist. And if evil doesn't exist, then what is everyone upset about? Therefore, any two, but not all three. That god is severely deficient, and so are his "children", who are natural-born-liars, who are then conditioned with some serious mind kontrol to become nightmare versions of their own nature, like grapes turned to wine, but in an evil way. And then psychotronics, and by now even the side effects of its sudden disablement, are the equivalent of MASS SOUL RAPE. That makes bottlenecks like interns seem like pebbles in a pile of rubble, as no serious cleanup crew is going to start their mess sorting out pebbles. And I'm not a CIA analyst, but I don't have to be to know about psychotronics and its applications. I'm not an official expert, but I don't have to be to put two and two together and get four. But it seems even experts can't do this sometimes, in some ways, and also that part of this can be explained by what I'm talking about, because I can, and what I explain about psychotronics literally takes all this other conventional (and perhaps "crypto-conventional") narratives, and puts them in their contexts as merely intermediate causes of the effects in the world which should be called "evil" in any way. Historically, and in this context in any world, conspiracies are, technically, a conventional narrative. The fact that people can be brainwashed so severely as to make a religious heretic out of anyone who understands the basics of political reality just 100 years ago, is not something that is attributable to the magic of celebrity boobs and flicker rates on T.V., though those are involved in the process, just as are bottlenecks in bureaucracies, and pebbles in rubble fields, but just in this case it is way more relevant. And while several "unconventional" vectors of influence are involved (toxicuetical "medicine", toxic food, air and water, financial mechanisms of fraud, Satanic bad attitudes, etc etc), this situation is far more than any particular vector of psychical distortion forces which any single known cause could achieve. It is their total field effect that is also not clearly just the sum of the partial causes of all the vectors. Their is the raising of evil to a higher dimension of efficiency. That is caused and completely modulated by psychotronic warfare systems as the creme-de-la-creme of the Full Spectrum Dominance Doctrine, fused with the PNAC-ZIO-X-Y-Z forces of darkness agendas of whatever flavor or stripe or origin, alien or not. And that trumps any bullshit about public interest through conventional modalities of political participation, however modified or altered by electronic media. Reread this paragraph, please. It is enough by itself to serve as a mantra for all the rest written here. So, I'm not combat field medic, but even my infantryman's training tells me that using these conventional domains of problem-reaction-pseudosolution narratives, it's just papering over a sucking chest wound. The human world is as dead spiritually, just as the Pacific ocean is dead from being Fuckushima-ed to hell already. The deaths are parallel. But the spiritual death happened long ago. That death is the corpse in which parasitically thrives the fertile filth of psychotronics, MK-ULTRA, breakaway pirate societies, and so on and so forth. Those are the forces of evil to behold and charge against with swords of Truth drawn, not the minor technical gremlins who wouldn't matter but as the minor moment of a sitcom in the 50s compared to the nightmare scenario of fucking psychotronic warfare! Reading me? Am I "getting through"? The conventional narratives are dead, too. And for the same reason. They are dwarfed in every way by the context which underwrites their meager relevance. That includes narratives about "fraud, waste, and abuse" as if these people are as stupid as alley junkies and don't have their act together. BULL SHIT. All those trillions represent funneling resources out of the economy in a massive amount for the sake of some other project, even if numbers are inflated into the arcane insignificance of fraudulent currency economics for lack of a better way to describe it. All these narratives are significant the way that a painting hanging sideways is less significant than the force of gravity which tilts it that way, and that because of the really important thing, which is that the Titanic is sinking. So I can't go along with the micro-narrative when it is so thoroughly disjointed from the real issue, the causes which make the evils of the micro-narrative such a damned hard thing for people to understand so that they can either play their violins, get into a lifeboat, or at least add some Zen to their pointless fascination with the details of how gravity affects the appearances of things when they are tilted 45 degrees. Whatever your flavor. But read the psychotronic writing one the wall which alone accounts for the quantitative distortion between people's ability to notice things falling over, noticing WHY they are falling over (gravity, tilt), and then WHY AND HOW that immediate cause is occuring, which is the MORE GENERAL CAUSE. The MORE SIGNIFICANT CAUSE. I'll explain this simply. The lesser cause of people's gripes are the effects. The meaningful cause is the major cause. The intermediate causes, which are effects proceeding from the main cause and issuing the effect, are only intermediary in nature. I want to go all the way from the effects to their principle cause so I can know if I can prevent the effect in an intermediate way, or if not then what I'm up against higher up on the causal chain, so I can proceed as needed until the problem, the effect, is solved. The standard narratives, however full of modernized Machiavellian dopes and dupes, foxes and wolves, sheep and whatever other chimera and portmanteu-worthy aberrations suitable for analogies to be made with the current stock of insane asylum escapees, are inadequate to the task of achieving ANY solution to the problem, because the main cause creates a change in the standard features of the intermediate causes, so that they appear one way (the standard way), but in fact are reinforced toward some other nature which is radically different than those appearances, but indistinguishable from its simulacrum as presented. That's a strong "mojo" to have over people's minds is it not? That means that psychotronics is the concrete answer to the equation. There is literally NO ACHIEVABLE ANYTHING unless that monstrosity in the room is addressed and dealt with. So am I a crackpot? Who cares? If what I'm saying is true (and it is), then I'm the sanest person in the world, crackpot or not. Am I an expert. One doesn't have to be in this matter. It is decidable by evidence and logic. Expertly prove what I'm saying to be a farce in the face of evidence and a half-decent ability to perform deduction and induction on that evidence, combined with what is already accepted in all known narratives that are at all coherent, and the conclusion will announce itself like an elephant shitting in your cereal, let alone standing in the corner of the room purple with pink polka dots, "special eyes" and a passion for stepping on people before they develop the courage to face it, but probably well-after they've eaten most of their shit-cereal... That's a pretty sadistic monster in the room is it not? Who needs Satan or Ahriman, when we have their asinine, teched up little whore brats running everything from the outer facades of "authority" to the inner sanctum of peverted temples and catacombs underneath supposedly hallowed places. This evil force would be bad enough, along with its evil shitlets who run amok on the earth, without psychotronics. But WITH psychotronics, it is STILL RAISED TO A HIGHER DIMENSION of evil than it ever was before. I'm saying to you that even if some outlandish impossibilities such as "demonic possession" were just some natural anomaly at one time, now it is a damned option in some monstrous little bunker some where, like something right out of a science fiction movie. It is now something that can be manufactured on demand. From myth, to some damned armory somewhere. From strange artifact from aliens from outerspace in a movie or a UFO story reel, now to a ubiquitous feature of the infrastructure of every object standing in or manufactured and used in this and most other countries of the world. Meanwhile this has been going on for who knows how long. Total surveillance, total influence, total control. Full spectrum dominance. Psywar by all means, including psychotronics and other invasive methods. All yesterday. To be unveiled tomorrow as something cute and pseudo-helpful. Like the society which gave it birth by its passive culpability on the one hand, and its active and tenacious determination on the other, like some unfathomable sado-masochistic phantasm suspended in nihilistic emptiness until Divine Authority finally smashes this damned illusion into the dust that settles into the outer shell of reality, and unfolds into its own oblivion, being oblivion in essence. Til then, it lurks ubiquitously: "Secretly. Silently. Certainly."

Some Wider Issues in a Larger Discussion which Are Usually Assiduously Avoided

Here is a video of an interview of Dr. Charles Hartshorne, Prof. Emeritus of Philosophy at the University of Texas at Austin. He died at his post at the age of 103, retiring from all duties just four years prior. We say "just" four years only when we cannot imagine how much life can be packed into such a large number of days, especially with the coherent body of work done stretching over that long duration of time to which someone like Dr. Hartshorne can take credit for creating. And with great merit.

In this video is an excellent discussion on the metaphysics of logical analysis, and some of the reverse. Why logic is what it is as a way of knowing what is, as such. It is not merely a concatenation of terms going through formulations of categorical thought about entities and properties and basically all the topics of ontology, mereology, metaphysics, logic and so on. It is more than words can ever say, more than symbols can directly symbolize. He knows this because Pierce made it clear in his very EFFORT to reach the semiotic LIMITS of ANY language, ANY event in existence or which is devised into existence by the mind of man. The result is that the semantic force, the causes of meaning, are not reducible to things or thoughts about things, however such things and thoughts about things must be so that such a semantic force can be expressed in this world, by a human mind. His discussion of concrete existents being in no positive way contrary to psychicalism. His very position is very akin to the thoughts of Berkeley on the nature of minds as distinct and non-reducible to matter. Yet he doesn't seem to understand that "feelings" or "subjective states" follow a course of processes which have to have an order, a nature, a form, and these must have an origin IN PRINCIPLE AND SUBSTANCE. All decisions, however independent in themselves in a given entity, cannot be said to be "unlike" the decisions of their Origin, however "volitional". So how can an evil decision be made? Only if it has something UNDIVINE about it. That is not a GENUINE FREEDOM BY DEFINITION. IT IS AN ERROR, A DEFORMITY, A SIN. That is what has led to our problems, this confluence of determinism and volition, which cannot have no cause, and yet cannot have Divine Cause. Therefore, it must have an EVIL cause, and that must be a mind, but it must be a mind with a DEFECT, not a mind whole and complete in its own nature. The only question is whether it can and should be corrected. Well, if that defect is not the result of Divine Negligence (?), and isn't Divinely Planned, then it is not a divine responsibility PER SE! Yet something is to be done about that. Otherwise. Otherwise, we have to say that "God" is just the asshole that lets evil exist, or even plans it to exist, and so far takes no responsibility for it, AND expects man to do nothing about it, yet blames him for it. Sometimes this weirdo version of "God" even wipes the debt clean (what debt? to whom? for what?), and does this be torturing himself as a strange, schizophrenic being, still putting a guilt trip on ant-like mushrooms who are called "who-man?" , who allow themselves by all forces to be kept in the dark and fed bullshit, and like it. That's a nightmare theology. UNLESS, it is the Truth, and "reality" is a nightmarish illusion. And so is its "God"... In which case, whatever REALLY IS DIVINE, is NOT OF THIS WORLD. How could this not be the most fundamental theological issue? How? I have said nothing new. This is some more of that "unsettled because undiscussed" information. The one-sided perversions after and beyond the massacres of those who didn't agree when threatened by force and torture and other punishments, DO NOT COUNT. That means the world of religion has been, aside from the Gnostic-content-based discussions, an EMPTY ROOM, filled only by cardboard cut-out CHARLATANS straight out of THIS Painting:


And look at both wings and center of this painting, which is the Triptych. But leaving this issue, which is paramount, to the side temporarily, the discussion about comparative religious issues in trying to understand the metaphysical structure which underpins religious beliefs, the specific issue of how Jainist conceptions, and in this case also Jewish conceptions of God (or God's inexistence, or irrelevance), and here one might include Deists and even some forms of what I call the General Gnosis (with different specific forms, such as Zoroastriansm, Buddhism, Confucianism, Daoism, Christianity, and really all religions with a similar structure of doctrine about Good and evil, the mind and the body, the Self and the world, these and other religions at least in their presumed original, uncorrupted forms). Both Jainists and Jews have a different "conception of God", and also have very different conceptions of the importance of the afterlife, and other matters of great importance such what to do with other life, other people, one's own body, what to eat, what to say or not say, what things to allow the mind to focus upon, what to never allow it to focus on, what to ensure it must always focus upon. All these things so different, but probably in most people's minds the EXACT OPPOSITE of what people would expect to result from their respective "beliefs about God". Frankly, the Jews display a very unJainlike behavior, but insist upon their "God", their boogey-man-in-the-sky, while the Jains insist on their principled ways of life, and don't speak of "God" as such. Nevertheless, the Jews DON'T consider an afterlife (except mockingly), but the Jains main focus is that afterlife as an extension of what is done in this life! It is a permutation of the logic of reincarnation theory, and very ethically focused. So some very ethicocentric people, regardless of their moral nature and actual conduct, have no interest in an afterlife, and believe in God, whereas another speak nothing of God, and firmly think that the afterlife is somehow the whole point of this temporary exercise of life, and they are also very ethicocentric, and with very different and much better and more respectable results. It's not as simple as saying that "belief in God" is good or holy or even right, and it is not as simple as saying having rigid and complicated ethical code means being really ethical, and it is not as simple as saying that a concern for the afterlife requires a belief in "God" (as most would mean it), and there is nothing incompatible of any of these with one another in any permutation, as they all can fit into the framework of a single man's body/mind/soul/spirit complex under many configurations. And that just brings us back to the paramount issue, which is the solving of problems which are so fundamental that they have appeared in "Reality as such", and that is whether or not you personify that Authority. Reality as such is "Authority" understood metaphysically, and not a relativized construct of organic robots milling about in open air urban prison environments, a.k.a. "who-mans?" It is about an ABSOLUTE TRUTH which when understood MORALLY leads a person to understand REALITY AS SUCH, and to chose to be IN ACCORD WITH THAT OR NOT. Now, why would that be so hard to understand for some? It is because they don't have that substantial accord WITHIN THEM EVEN AS A REAL POTENTIAL UNTAPPED. They are, as Jesus rightly said, "Children of the Liar". They are "philosophical zombies" of a spiritual sort. This has not been addressed adequately at all by the mainstream thought on religion for obvious reasons. They seem uncomfortable broaching a subject like this because it mirrors the reality about them in an unfavorable way both practically and ultimately. Suppressing this Truth about the world has been the whole objective of those who have gotten their demonic paws all over it. Psychotronics is currently involved. This is more as concrete of an event, this conflict between types of beings, categorized as different SUI GENERIS due to their different moral essences (Good and evil), as Hartshorne could ever have hoped to encounter.

And out of respect for Hartshorne, I have to say I am enamored with this way of expressing the absolute and relative perfections, their manner of expression in possible world terms, and the logic of his "de facto" Best. Brilliantly put. I have always held the same view of the (ironic) immortality of the past (and of the future, and hence the present), and also of the consequentialist aspects of Divine Experience (what I refer to as "Divine Luxury"). Dr. Hartshorne discusses these matters with the overarching idea that things can be made more precise, and dogma needn't necessarily obstruct this process just as long as this process leads to the Truth, but it isn't necessarily the other way around. Truth is not predicated upon the failure to overturn dogmas, no matter how well-cherished by whom. It is the ultimate fraud of this world to have corrupted all these notions into physicalist, monarchist terms and forms. As I said Bosch could paint it better than anybody could say it.

An Evil Culture Runs Amok Over a Herd of Oblivious Meat Machines

People who experience certain forms of harassment and covert aggression are not necessarily deluded or in any inherent way "mentally ill". They are being attacked by means of covert operations being conducted against them, and these are full spectrum attacks. It cannot be that many people coherently describe phenomena they are experiencing and be "merely deluded", especially not when these events, these phenomena, and these descriptions are all very consistent with one another in their form and content, and which can all be attributed to real human actions which are documented to occur 1) on an anthropological level 2) on a historical level and 3) on an institutional level, which has been demonstrated to occur in some institutions that have certain forms of access to the required resources, both of materiel and of social sanction, to undertake their covert and criminal activities.
These are not delusions, these are inferences validly derived from verifiable and real facts. This is a sound and valid exposure of something real going on in the world, of which many are a part (all of whom will openly deny it), and as targets of which are many of the people in disbelief about its existence... So denial of this phenomenon is not evidence against it, and this could have very dire consequences for all involved, and for society as a living entity, as a whole. It is evil on a scale that must be explained rationally, and just calling people names which presume to invalidate their minds at the beginning is not going to cut it.

Delusions are not coherently explicable by reference to evidence, and these events are all documented as existing forms of human social behavior, here in a covert from, where one individual or group seeks dominance over another or others, and these are the techniques they use to SUBLIMATE their actual intentions. It is a form of "intentional telegraphing" to modify a boxing term. This creates a self-reinforcing form of conditioning, which has various kinds of predicted and predictable effects. And all these methodologies are simply forms of behavior which are applied for this specific purpose. Example: Simulating a sort of inconvenience of any kind, which is easily simulated and totally not an impossible thing to occur on accident, but actually simulating it, and not even with a sense of authenticity in most cases, but just as a means of actually multiplying the "obstacles" in your lane of action. They do this hoping for it to feel "extra dissonant and inconvenient" so to speak. It even helps if they reveal a certain amount of disingenuousness, because while it is annoying in itself, you can tell they are in bad faith, but you can't believe or imagine how they could be in such bad faith that an accident becomes a means of hating you (for their own mistake often times), and so it seems strange, yet has that negative impact. It inserts an irrational aspect to a situation which is already disturbing to one's optimal action in the world. This is a subtle, metaphysical sort of attack if you think about it in terms of possible world theory as it refers to how humans cognize their world and their sense of reality. They are also directly injurious in ways that are strictly not only perverse, not only illegal, but also outright evil beyond even the pettiness which is behind organizing the grocery-shopping interference brigade. It is also connected to the latter, so it reveals a RACKET. It is organized crime on the level of RACKETEERING. But it isn't merely criminally huge, but it is hugely EVIL. It is for evil purposes, not as a counteraction to a prohibition, or an ethnic community trying to cement and protect their entrenchment in the early days of immigration into NYC from Sicily or some other "mother country" when things were tough on those people and prohibition and heavy taxes on tobacco created a tempting market for desperate and also greedy and evil people. Well, that's not even what's going on here. What's going on here is pure, psychopathic subculture's not unlike, ironically (as I'll explain later) the people seen in the "Hostel" movies. Example: Torture is an activity which, in direct form, would take the form of all these activities but without any covert aspect. So instead of needing to use technology of any kind to track you and interrupt your sleep, they'd have you in a cell and monitoring you. Since they don't have that luxury, or because they have an objective based upon where you are "at large", they must insinuate these same sleep-disturbing effects through more complex monitoring and more covert forward deployment of equipment and personnel disguised as neighbors, as common equipment and devices, and so on. So therefore they can infiltrate any situation to utilize it as a form active, forwardly and conveniently deployed, highly invasive and persistent, pervasive, torture, but which is kept as subliminal as possible while still being effective enough to distract and destabilize a person's mind and life. it is the same thing, but extruded into public, and invasively into private spaces, which should not be thought of as "torture cells", but they functionally transform any such spaces into a sort of "mobile" equivalent. That is a very logical, coherent, and predictable modification of a direct method of doing A into a covert form of doing A. It is not anything but this. So, just as if they had a person in a torture cell and could force them to watch images, so if they are "freely" out in public or at home, they can be by means of technologically sophisticated methods invade the person's senses in those spaces either by invasive procedures, directed energy, programmed internet topologies, subliminals through media focused on an individual (personalized media, dual purpose technologies), and even just people presenting such images in their words and actions and presentations (people who are working along with this program, not random people). This is an active program of covert torture. It is torture, extended into the public and private sphere. It is not wrong because it is extended into these spheres covertly, that's not what makes it wrong. It is not wrong because they use resources "tagged" as a quantity of money supposedly derived from taxes, though that makes it ironic. It is wrong because it is torture, and torture is always wrong and evil, and must be punished by death. I'm not joking. It must become a capital offense to perform torture, and this must be made a capital offense for any adult who engages in it, and it must be a matter of serious concern if any minor, especially young child, were doing such things for the reasons which are obvious. Naturally, it should not be allowed merely because the child is now physically large and mentally cunning. It is evil and wrong, and must be stopped, wherever and whenever it occurs. AND WHAT MAKES IT ESPECIALLY HEINOUS is how COWARDLY it is, since they are hiding and aiming at people in public and in private under the cover of propriety, accident, plausible random events, authority, emergency, lies and smokescreens generally. If they are allowed to do this, then they are monsters running amok, nothing more and nothing less. People who don't wake up to this and face this are SPIRITUALLY DEAD. The people engaged in this evil are DEMONIC IN NATURE. They cannot be considered human. They must be arrested, tried, and if found guilty of these activities of torture, then they must be sentenced by law to death. At least they will not be tortured to death. And it is assured, life in a proper prison for them would be lifelong torture by definition, so I'm suggesting a law which hurts them least. Spiritually, I know that this public will not do this Right Thing, and so society will be gradually and then suddenly imploded by more false flag events of "terror", disaster, or other emergency, and their "free dumbs" totally "taken away" (they're already slaves, they don't face Truth at all). So it will destroy itself, this corrupt society, and this will be accompanied by world events which will require the destruction of much of the human and other life on the surface. This is what is coming. So, while facing all this, prepare your souls and Spirits for what is coming our way. And by the way, HOSTELS are HOTBEDS of these filth, who recruit all sorts of lowlife youth in those places. Wow, it's right out there in everyone's faces to see these people are basically funneled through those places, and use them for many operations. I tested the nerve of one of these by investigating it as a potential renter (this was in Austin), and found that they were actually very much like a cult, and this is supposed to be "random people just passing through" but there was a feeling of "secret society cult". They also had a massive cell-mast right in their parking lot... And it should be noted they had much artwork and heavily grungy and morally vapid cocky youth working there, and when I simply chatted with them "longer than they felt comfortable" (I can't "be myself", only they have that privilege, they seem to feel), they suddenly reacted to me as though I were an alien, and treated me as if I were an outsider of a special secret group who walked into a room he wasn't supposed to know exist, and just as if they could all turn on me together if they had to. Not like people who don't know each other, or who just work there, or who have BUSINESS AS SHOWN ONLY, but there was definitely an understructure, and they were definitely paranoid about my curiosity. They freaked out. And when the Psychotronic Control Grid is shut down, it is going to get REALLY INSANE. That's what all the "zombie training exercises" of the military, and their urban exercises, are about. They have been planning to manufacture a psychotronically enhanced "apocalyptic scenario" for a long time. Little do they seem to understand, is that a REAL apocalypse is coming and is inevitable. Perhaps they know, and are trying to "control the chaos" in advance by just triggering the human consequences of such before it happens, and then "bracing for impact".

To Everyone and Sundry According to Their Character, To Whomever It Applies, You Know Who You Are

One has to take this "joke" seriously, even while admitting the transcendental nature of humor.

It's like a Hess Diagram of how "purity" is treated in the world, with a final outcome that it becomes an edifice of the authority used as a cover for its immolation. It is just as though there is a cult of people who choose to be gullible and foolish, in spite of knowing or at least suspecting it is not really a good idea, no matter what the "incidental busy work" suggests to the contrary. Just enough purity is left over to still "believe in humanity" enough that they cannot be brought to the point of tearing apart the whole institution in a fit of rage, nor commit suicide, nor murder a priest in vengeance, nor even doubt the religious authority which works so well as a cover for such heinous acts, which are apparently not as systematic as is exaggerated here, but may as well be, given that it seems not to make sense people allow this to on at the rate that it does. It may as well be that the perpetrators somehow deeply "have their evil act together", down the brass tacks of manipulating social psychology of look-the-other-way cowardice, sheep-like adherence to arbitrary authority whenever it is backed by power which is arbitrarily attached to said authority, and whose only (presumed and stated) condition for the use of said force is disobedience.
Well, working with that sort of clay you can sculpt just about anything into a "purity brick". And then you can mold it into just about anything. It only makes sense to convert some of that energy back into the system which made that possible, to feed the flock of sheep in some way that both keeps them under one's control as well as fattens them enough for the purpose for which they're kept, which is wool and meat, and perhaps something more depending on who you ask about sheep herders. How ironic. But more seriously, this did not start overnight. It didn't start recently. It took a long time for people to be SO TRAUMATIZED by that institution, over literally nearly two thousand years, although the first three centuries are in a fog as to their actual origins, being that only one major form persisted, with some large scale fracturing, and which thrived on gathering and destroying, or preserving secretly only, but in any event depriving of others many materials of a religious and spiritual nature, and really of ANY sort. They were the controllers of literary culture in a rather DIRECT way for a long time... They acquired that role through connections to governmental authority, and if you think about it, that's natural because that's another institution that reserves the right to rape people at will, which they do with rather sophisticated methodologies these days. So with all that abuse, it's sort of no surprise that they can't get their heads around their own misery and "just deal with it". Then again, that's bullshit. Get your heads out of your asses and face the truth about the world in which you live, and stop raping the sand with your head.

Basically, the evil assholes run the mob almost effortlessly, especially with today's technology, and the only thing worthwhile to do is constantly tell them that until they are forced to drop their masks, and then, stab them in the face. Let me explain how this should be done.
First off, we know about you. We know of your methods of control and how it involves control of information, and how you network as well. We know about it. SO.. just turn yourselves in. Let go of the fake power, and throw yourselves into the evil machine your hiding behind. That's the only way you will preserve yourselves from a worse hell. That's where evil people go. It's not a lie. The Catholic Church says that you must obey them or you go to hell. That's not the same as saying that evil people go to hell. It doesn't contradict that all evil people go to hell, either. Perhaps everyone goes to hell except Catholics, but even evil Catholics go to hell, which is almost redundant, but hey. Reality repeats itself. It's the basis of inertia according to Leibniz. You have to live with these things. Like hell, where you're going and where you'll "live" as soon as, or even beginning before your body "dies", which is to say stops breathing permanently. That's a choice you know. You can't not choose to keep breathing against the grain of death, just as you can't choose to stop breathing against the grain of life. You'll see when it comes for you how you can't make that choice until you "die". Then judgment. You will examined based upon your deeds, including all the lying and murdering and manipulation and greedy deceit and foul perversion and hideous cruelty and all manner of arbitrary indulgence in vain fantasies of godhood and other blasphemies and the list goes on. It's the REAL version of your FAKE "authority" which you exercise over the idiots who deserve most of what they are getting. But they have demanded the Truth lately, so they deserve at least that one demand for all they've endured... hideous as they are for having willingly endured it for so long. It must be remembered that many did not and do not, and some will change their minds more and more as these "last days" roll along. Therefore, you should turn yourselves in rather than wait until that point that you envy all those who did, and even all those who already died and got that out of the way so their sentence in hell good get started sooner, and therefore possibly finish sooner. But how hell works is another matter. The point is that it would lessen in intensity and duration if you stopped your evil now and turned yourselves in as a sacrifice to the deformed machine you call your own authority and power and thereby you'd actually be fulfilling your presumed obligations outright, and would also be, for a brief moment, "Christlike", in that you'd be what people take Christ to be (albeit wrongly) and would be a sacrifice to the principles you espouse. Therefore you'd be fulfilling your own often completely disingenuous claims to understand the doctrine that Christ was an innocent sacrificed for the sake of the guilty. You'd go one better! You'd be the GUILTY sacrificed for their own GUILT, TO the LESS GUILTY *(but more numerous and pathetic in some ways), the "man of flesh" who stabilized your atrocities with their involvements both active and passive. So as soon as you get that out of the way, you begin your sentence in hell after the Judgement, and all the sooner and with less pain overall, and with presumably less duration, it depends strictly on you how LONG that lasts. The quantity of punishment is proportional to your will to endure it, and it does not end until it is endured at its peak intensity, and that only comes about as all antecedent intensities are completely endured, but each moment only ends when the next more intense one is embraced. That is literally how it is where you are going. Because you have made that the way it is here for those who have embraced what is RIGHT and what is TRUE against the grain of your evil for thousands of years and more. So, as they say, "Go to hell". Best advice you're ever going to get.

Evil's End: Desirable, Inevitable, Imminent

I have seen the Truth. I have seen the people who were Right treated wrongly. I have seen the Right Itself, that Great Spirit, treated wrongly. Righteous were sacrificed to the desires of evil beings, EVIL ITSELF, while this was promised to cowards to allow them to rule over the Courageous!!! And ALL OF THEM, all of them, even the once-courageous, in the end they scapegoat the VERY BEST of men, the innocent children who remained innocent in their lives as men and women, and even INNOCENT CHILDREN! When even the best of men, who were wise and good, but not numerous or powerful, showed the ultimate courage and sacrificed themselves in SO MANY WAYS to combat this evil, THEY were framed and assassinated!!!

All so cowards could look the other way, all so cowards could rule over lesser cowards, grinding the Righteous TO A NUB! Grinding them away with covert suppression, overt aggression throughout their childhoods as well as brainwashing, intimidation, and all manner of hideous abuse! It is an all out evil assault for evil's own sake!  All of this, ALL OF THIS is the doing of ALL who participated, no matter how low their "rank" in the hierarchy of cowardice, no matter how hidden their echelon. The Father of Right, the Great Author of Justice, who wields the Sword of Truth, SEES AND KNOWS ALL.

So keep doing your WORST. Keep taking bribes, keep indulging perversions, keep doing unspeakable things in the dark, if you can. If it is permitted by Heaven then it was for a reason. But expect no mercy or kindness from me.  Expect no quarter.  And think carefully about what it adds up to when all this time you have for your evil COMES TO AN END.  Think about it now, as you will then.

So few people willing to expose or even to face these evils going on, or even to let themselves realize that it is possible, so few compared to the swelling masses of people who are nothing but amoral and immoral meat machines.  This proportion is so enormously in favor of evil, and is functioning with such a thin veneer of sanity, that if they were suddenly exposed to the FULL TRUTH OF WHAT IS GOING ON in such a way that it would be undeniable even to them, the masters of denial (they are good at something! at looking away!), they would lose INSTANTLY their sanity, as their world of delusion would have to collapse with their papier-mâché world. They will suffer greatly as they realize all that they were responsible for allowing and for even helping along.  They will not escape JUDGEMENT.

But how can they do anything now, now that their souls are either completely black, paper thin, chewed up, or all three? They would be instantly driven insane.  They would destroy the world in a day, or at least half of it. The rest would be certain and miserable decline into complete destruction... Only the worst of the worst could "thrive" in that environment. And it is coming SOON on the heels of current events...  The psychotronic control grids "going offline" alone would cause this sort of disaster, even if all other parts of the world were left unchanged!!!

How do you like that?  You are in a psychotronic control grid PRISON which is of YOUR OWN MAKING. Well, I'm not going to be a part of it, and neither will many others.  I won't back down or change anything, and neither will they.  I won't ever become like you mewling cowards and neither will they. And all the rest of you bastards can do is GO. TO. HELL. And you will, in a hand basket.

And as I say, whether the world is willing to face up to what it has been up to or whether it will keep on looking the other way, either way it will destroy itself and  >THESE DAMNED SCUM WHO ARE IN ON IT WILL GET THE WORST POSSIBLE TREATMENT< both in their bodies and beyond...  You'll become the Demiurge's edible paste for eons!  You don't even have nightmares of hell which can compare with what its like to BE THERE.  And THERE you will be, if you aren't there already.

So it has taken so long for so few to "wake up" that it is clear that the course of self-destruction is inevitable, and in fact it is DESIRABLE.  

Let me GUESS, the reader, 90% of cases no matter their intelligence being higher or lower than average, has failed to understand why I say that the inevitable self-destruction of the world is desirable.  I understand your problem.  You are the reason it is desirable.  You are the norm.  I just wrote down here that the world has a monkey on its back that is so large and so dug in, and the world is in such denial about it that, if it were to actually ever dare get the guts to try and do something about it, even FACE it, even contemplate the barest POSSIBILITY of doing so, it crumples like a papier-mâché being without any substance!  That means the ONLY DESIRABLE THING TO DO, which is to face the truth and deal with it, will lead to the self-destruction of half of the world in a day, and the rest will envy the dead until this is all mercifully ended by some cataclysm, the sooner the better.

People who can't face this they really love their paternal yet sadistic state powers ruling over them and spying on them and covertly torturing them.  THEY LOVE IT.  They are each told the story that they are special, they are needed, they are beloved, and then that SO AND SO is to be thrown out, so and so is outcast, so and so has done wrong.  They degrade so and so, and seek ways to make so and so the scapegoat, to RISE UP in the system of cowardly calumny and cowardly, mousy forms of assassination and narcissistic self-emolument.

GROTESQUE.

And you want what instead?  You want it to drag out this way until it finally does itself in without EVER facing the Truth?  Aren't you a damned coward. Go to hell with the rest of them.

As for the REST of you, who probably don't even read this because of some cyber-bubble they've put on anything I encounter on the GLORIOUS INTERNET (police state surveillance/propaganda device and psychotronic weapons platform... and yet I'm actually using this damned thing), I tell you that you must not allow yourselves to be lulled into believing in any distractions from the Truth, you must always demand of yourselves the Best Conscience and the Highest Vision with the Strongest Integrity.  It is all you really have, and it is all you will take with you if you should have the glorious opportunity to cross the Rainbow Bridge, leading an army of your enemies to plunge into their deaths behind you.  YOU can see the Rainbow Bridge, THEY cannot.  YOU WILL CROSS, they will not.  But some will dare attempt to follow you.  Some will not admit to themselves that you are beyond their power and reach... They see you doing a wonder, seemingly walking over a void toward Freedom Eternal. They will commit one last act of aggression, one last despicable low of envy and spite will urge them to chase you, to not dare look so weak and helpless with all those they have at their beck and call.  Or they'll command others to chase you, and THEY will fall. But whoever falls, they will all see their hopeless doom.  Soon the realms behind them will fall, all into that same pit.  

They will envy those who fell first, they will envy all the realms beyond them, anyone who doesn't share their fate in one last pathetic gesture of consciousness before being torn apart by the singularity which collapses into oblivion. It will not be a pleasant process, but a Just one, and one which would be for the protection of the Good and Innocent, which will never be undone for Eternity.

Everyone, by now, ought to be able to tell which kind of being THEY are by a sense of their being doomed or else being vindicated by their lives, by their actions, by their character. The Great Separation is complete in spite of all attempts to delay it.  The results are inevitable. The execution of the sentence is imminent. 

Leaden Feathers Painted White

Comedians round out the areas missed by rule of reason and law, wherein these areas are subject to the rule that human tragedy is better considered a result of ignorance, incompetence, or some other reason which falls short of real  malice in the responsible agent. It is to remediate tragedy, but this by some means so as to rightly demand responsibility in viewing the matter truthfully, so as to avoid such unnecessary and unwanted evil in the future.  It is like confessing the worst so that we may then get past it by facing it properly and trying to deal with it responsibly from then on. It is in the energy of tension that this releases, in the way that it rounds out the injustices of the human condition by making them something people can openly address without bullshitting themselves or each other. If it really accomplishes this task, then  that tension is released and things change everywhere that has influence, and people smile and laugh. But this has a dark side in that it may be inflated in its impact, and be a papier mache version of the real thing in some universes. I say that in this universe it precisely is this according to all evidence.

Some main grief about comedians is their tendency to get certain things completely wrong, but drag laughs out of the public. So in this act Bill Burr decides it's cute to become a little miniature Bill Gates on the issue of "overpopulation". It's just like listening to Bill Gates coated with an outer layer of hard-nosed stand up comic routine. And then he leaves politics alone and gets honest about what he knows and becomes relevant again (as soon as the Bill Gates bit is over). But it never exceeds the boundaries of pointing up human stupidity and underplaying the element of malice just enough as not to alienate the audience. It will never exceed that boundary, never again like it did with George Carlin. These shock comics are not very shocking nor about issues as substantive, albeit sometimes, as with his bit about Hillary and "someone wearing a goat head".

Same with female on male violence, same with misidentified "pedophilia", which is nothing more than the same fraternal affection any man feels for his own children. And yes, society is hideous in its deformity of values in these areas, and so yields the manifestation of an absurd cultural distortion of what constitutes sanity on those and other subjects where the facts completely contradict the common attitude or perspective, often both. There is a lot of important dystopic dissonance that he brings up in his work, and some of it has even novel psychological, scientific interest in that it can be quantified and generalized upon even by simple thought experiment. He might touch on some such issues in the form of questioning people's rationale for justifying female violence in their reactions to his jokes, and yet showing a contrary attitude when the same violence is perpetrated by him at random people for arbitrary reasons. This disproportion is shown as prima facie evidence of a fundamental absurdity in the human condition. He could go very deep into that topic just by saying the absurdity out loud as a suggestion.

Another example is when he insists that a straight man's revulsion at seeing a male homosexual act is unjustly stigmatized because it is both natural and non-malicious. He made allowance for context and manner, but that still just made his case. So he goes into another comfort zone of the masses and just takes another justified jab at social ignorance and hypocrisy. At the same time this issue really goes beyond his statement of it, as it is the case that in fact that heterosexual revulsion with homosexual activity is always stronger in nature than homosexual revulsion with heterosexual activity. 

The truth is, a properly speaking heterosexual male is revolted by both parties of the homosexual male couple's sexual activities. It is simply a natural revulsion, which is inverse to their attraction to their proper sexual object. It is almost as if this has to be explained.  So this revulsion, which is naturally stronger in the heterosexual when viewing a homosexual act, HAS TO BE THIS WAY because he cannot identify with either member of the activity, and yet the are both male (using the male example, as it may be asymmetrical across the sexes, although still polarized in the same general way). But if either a homosexual person or heterosexual person witnesses a HETEROSEXUAL act, then the heterosexual must still "edit out" the male in order or else distance himself from that (unless he's a pervert or perhaps the PDA police). Ruling out that, a person, in this case a heterosexual male, would prefer not to stare at this scene. He might even prefer to see two women kissing if they both might like his company. I think most heterosexual males would prefer to see that to a man and woman going at it. In the contrary case, it is like saying they prefer to see a naked man's body rather than two naked women's bodies, which is absurd.

The point is that in this regard, while the heterosexual male will have a distinct revulsion at the heterosexual couple's sexual activity (but only because the man must be displaced with effort in the mind which is contrary to the facts witnessed and so creates dissonance in him, even though he naturally identifies with the male's position: these complement one another synergistically). But when the homosexual male sees a heterosexual act, it is not a serious challenge for the homosexual male to "edit out" the female, because as a gay male he cannot seriously identify with her, but in the same situation the heterosexual male can more easily identify with his own "body double" and exercise an Oedipal fantasy through the act. He may fantasize taking the other man out of the equation and replacing him, literally. That can be subconscious, but it can underscore the whole tone of how he perceives an open heterosexual PDA. But the only physical way that a homosexual male could put himself in that relationship is to change his sexual orientation to replace the man, or else to fake doing so to fool the woman, and there is no sexual reason for him to do either. But there is a ready-made reason for the heterosexual male to place himself in the scene. But the homosexual male can only do so by changing his body's physical gender.

So this is more revolting for a gay man to contemplate (especially if body-proud) than it is revolting for a heterosexual male to have his Oedipal fantasies arbitrarily dredged up in his subconscious while he's trying to eat lunch, and for any other number of reasons. It is more revolting to the gay man, but it is still somewhat revolting to the straight man. But the degree of revoltingness to the gay man is not at all like the homosexual scene is for the straight man who happens to see it, and so the strong asymmetry. This is true in spite of the also unfortunate fact that men are taught that perversion is cool and masculine so many will act like this scene is all good for them, the same way the pickle their own brains with alcohol for decades. Out of sheer stupidity, nothing to do with being a man. So unless he has that perverted persona, he might often NOT want to have that displayed to him while hes having a meal. Perhaps he just finds it a distasteful behavior to display even at Denny's, which is like the Jerry Springer of places to eat food. But the revulsion is there in any event, and yet it doesn't require him to change his physical gender in order to see himself in there somehow.

So we see both straight and gay males have "decency revulsion" at their type of sexual displays in public, straight males have only sexual object revulsion, but more than double that which a gay man has looking at a straight interaction, plus it is indecent at the venue perhaps. But the homosexual male can place himself in as the female counterpart of the male by removing her from the relationship and pretending the straight man is gay. There is no similar recourse to the straight man seeing two men kiss, regardless of either one's sexuality.

That's why we seeing two men kissing is so obscene for straight males, as it is impossible even in la la land to place ourselves anywhere near that situation, and why it is not a fair comparison to speak of what revulsion gay men may experience when viewing heterosexual activity. They naturally experience less in that sexuality is physical, and the sexuality of the object can be projected in the subconscious fantasy, and so there may be compensatory activity to offset the revulsion in his case. But again, not so for the straight male in the complementary scenario involving two men, EVEN WHEN THEY ARE STRAIGHT MEN, as depicted in various scenarios where it is an expression of some noble sentiment, some form of insanity, or even just an alien getting confused about human rituals. It is still always revolting. There is no earthly solution but to be extremely, naturally revolted. So it's worse than Bill Burr expresses it, and he's nice about this issue because it is a sort of strange asymmetry that could be interpreted, and is so interpreted by some, as being not in favor of homosexuality as a natural psychological condition, biologically in many ways. So this is clearly a "limit" in what he can broach, or else he might.

It is not even a big point in itself, but rather it shows there is a fuller truth that he cannot bring out as it would be "too much" for the audience to be something he can make funny at this stage. The truth is too absurd for comedy, and yet that is exactly the content that needs to brought to people's attention.  That is where philosophers SHOULD have stepped in from their Ivory Towers and realized the Truth and expressed it but largely did not, although nowhere else in the totality of the fabric of human existence did there appear anyone who did this except for the philosopher. You can bet that the people in the American Philosphical Association are no better of a crowd among whom to pander blatant truths without vetting oneself as a brother in the cult of full-time truth obfuscation as an intellectual gatekeeper against people realizing the Truth. But since that's the case, there is nothing genuinely "philosphic" about that crowd, and I'm not going to care one whit for their attention, as it has no relevance to these matters about which they are so unqualified to discuss but rather have a lot for which to answer in their conduct.

So a good thing about his comedy is that he pushes in the direction of settling issues in favor of reality that society would, in its aberrant role of "ruling mob", prefer to keep ambiguous or hidden, as long as it doesn't have to face an unpleasant sense of its own fragile condition, getting nearer a breaking point as chemical, propagandistic, economic, social and psychological, even psychotronic warfare is being conducted against them should they vary from script, and scapegoats in all this villainy are veritably drafted from the pool of those who see through this facade and thoroughly refute it, ethically, morally, and spiritually. They don't like it when they're shown for what they truly are. And that is the minimum that we can say. Just as what people are prepared to listen to from the audience is a factor in how far Bill Burr will go with his material, and by extension even what he may consider or realize even apart from seeking material, so there are people who are listening in smaller audience who prefer to use the aforementioned "grid" of methodologies, and they will use pressures and coercion of their own, just ask certain popular yet estranged or dead comedians.

It stands as a case in determining with some sense of empirical and logical evidence what are the demonstrable boundary lines in popular consciousness, as well as in those who somehow pander to those limits to make a living. These boundary lines indicate with objective and quantifiable as well as subjective and qualified facts of experience by which to be assessed on all scales and  hence given a metaphysically significant evaluation. Bill Burr is not yet making the sort of headway that a George Carlin made, albeit mostly in his very last years of a long career...  It is not telling well for the world's future when this is the best it can do to make fun of its own absurdity, as this barely scratches the surface.  It has to go way deeper than these issues to hit paydirt.  But as he says in his interviews, in his own words as I paraphrase them, "as soon as you start to talk about stuff like 9-11 or the Patriot Act, people start looking at you like you're crazy".  And he feels this way as a comedian who thrives on making looking crazy work for his act.

When wisdom does not guide members of the community at large, they then fall prey as fools to those who merely wear the robes of wisdom, but simply wish to run a scam on the public. Philosophers become curators of a dead language, whether or not they act with discipline upon their own ethical proclamations, and vain sophomoric sadistic cowards lead the population into absolute corruption and inevitable glorification of their flesh and and soul's subjection to every tyranny and debasement imaginable. A firm diagnosis of a society can be obtained with the examination of what it takes to be valuable and true, and how it reacts at seeing itself in the mirror of its own actions. In the case of the present society, all of these outer symptoms which can barely be broached in comedy are handled only in the alternative (publicly shunned) media as in this article (with extremely good artwork, btw) or instead displaced into fantastically surreal horror genres of all artistic media, and yet this is not seen for what it is, as a reflection in the mirror. That's what George Carlin was closer to nailing, and which Louis C.K. is not able to reach. He also showed up the mirror to The Thing that Should Not Be, but then he revealed himself to be a head on one of the monster's manifold Lovecraftian anatomy, and so is more of a surreal shock gone wrong than anything like moment of dignity in the face of tragedy, which Carlin seemed to sense humanity needed and couldn't muster.

He was right if did hold that view, as since his time it has gotten worse, not better, and in all areas of human existence, worldwide.  The world is closing to its complete nullification, brought on by the heaviness of its heart on the Scales of Anubis.