Notes On Good And Evil

The painter Gaugain had some questions for us:

I. WHO ARE WE?
II. WHERE ARE WE GOING?
III. WHAT ARE WE DOING HERE?

I look around, and I see progress in technology, science, space flight, infrastructure and transport since Gaugain gave us these questions. But I see no thing that provides any definitive answers. If we take a look at what we know for certain, there are gaping holes in out knowledge of our past, for example. The evolution theory, for example, has been whole-heartedly swallowed by the mainstream, even though archeology awaits the discovery of the definitive ‘missing link’. Though evolution elegantly envisions a dynamic whereby ‘selection’ is carried forward by the stark logic of survival, the major caveat is this: why should we assume that human and animal evolution follow the same logic?
   The same goes for our understanding of the properties of the human body. There remains areas of research completely unexplored that would completely shift modern medicine. Why, for instance, has the extensive research in the field of Quantum Mechanics not been applied to the dynamics of human psychology? There are fascinating atomic and sub-atomic properties of the human DNA helix, and the pineal gland (what the hell is a gland doing in the centre of the skull with light receptors pointing inwards – much like a closed eye – where there’s no chance of light getting!?!). These areas of human biology have been cast as ‘fringe’. That is to say, the opportunity to research these fields is there, but has been rejected.
   This is to hint at purely clinical answers to the above questions. What about the more intuitive answers as to the nature of the human condition and its place within the Universe? There are certain personalities we have credited with having great insight into the nature of humanity and the human condition. We know them by name. They are Plato, Shakespeare, Goethe, Nietzche, Beckett, to name five. These people have earned some concrete position in the historical cannon, and I have my own list drawn from the present day. The reason why we credit these individuals is because they provoke questions in us, the same questions Gaugain posed. Yet, for all the brilliance of their art, they could only provide hints and speculation. The greatness of their work rests in their reflection of the vast mystery of human existence. None has come forward with a set of formal answers, whether intuited or discovered by experimentation.
   This lack of answers to Gaugains questions, and questions akin to them, is my defintion of ‘Good’. Everyone, by definition of the fact that we do not have the answers, is ‘Good’. Whether you want to know the answer or do not care, it doesn’t matter. We’re all in the same boat of innocence with this one. What of Good and Evil in relation to criminality? Doesn’t a criminal, by stepping outside of what is sanctioned as ‘good’ embrace its opposite? However, even a serial killer will display moments of this same innocence from which art is derived. Having just taken life, the killer shouts to the sky ‘oh why did you make me this way?!’, or something to that desperate effect in their internal dialogue. Those characters we assume are brutally cold can actually be brought to tears when shown unconditional kindness. Anecdotally, the same serial killer breaks down when offered a cigarette by a fellow inmate, the dam of supposed evil constructed by mistrust breaks. The point is that the ‘coldness’ ascribed to such individuals does not equate to an indifference some higher knowledge would bring, as one might expect if you sought to transcend the petty moral platitudes of the mainstream. The life of the criminal, who riotously enjoys all that is forbidden by the straight-and-narrow, is filled with the very same lack of answers that characterizes the same society that deems their actions immoral.
   Now we have a unitary definition of Good which is absent of ideology, punishment and reward, and so the justice systems of the Earth. What then, is ‘Evil’?
In relation to this definition of Good, Evil can be defined thus: the Evil individual knows the answers to Gaugain’s questions, and more, and uses this knowledge against us ‘innocent humans’. The Evil individual(s) know humanity to its core, and therefore are able to construct mechanisms of control around the innocent human without the human noticing. One thinks how easy we humans trick an animal into performing certain actions based upon known causes and effects of animal psychology. For example, whales can be lured to their death with sonar; a dog can be trained by conditioning; the simple development of the hinge allowed us to entrap our next meal. These animals aren’t stupid, just as we’re not stupid. We’re able to eat them because we know their reactions based on observation. It is our innocence – our Goodness – that we assume we are top of the food chain based on how efficiently we can despatch those animals ‘below’ us.
   You might say – even if you can accept my definition of Good – that such an individual cannot exist. “How and where could this knowledge be obtained and kept secret? And then, how could this knowledge be formalized into a ‘plan’, and executed without all the humans waking up to the fact?”
   In terms of proof, a flaw in my ‘working definition’ is that in order to prove Evil, the definition of Good must first be proved. If you ever wanted to know how to trick humans, you would start out by observing them, experimenting on them, knowing their physiology and psychology to its absolute core. I am talking beyond a biological understanding of process, to the point where it is known what the human is prone to doing in essence, based upon properties that only the Human possesses. Then you would formalize a list of the properties of a human being. This would be the basis of your playbook.
   I want to write this list! But since this is only an introduction to this idea, and this entry is getting extended, perhaps I should offer my Definition of the Human Being in bite-sized chunks. Watch this space…
   To wrap it up, I only have this to say: there is a lot of info around about a race of telepathic, human-eating (they prefer children because the flesh hasn’t yet been contaminated) reptile people from the Draco star system, who transported humans from the Lira system over one hundred and forty thousand years ago, and transplanted them on Earth, genetically engineering and cross-breeding with them so that they be more suited to enslavement and performing the chores the reptile people deemed necessary, namely the mining of natural resources for their own purposes. Certain human families were nominated as ‘rulers’, and continue to this day in those roles who, in indirect conference with the reptile people, develop programs to further weaken and enslave the human race.
   Now, it is certainly true that the monarchies and presidents of the world are inter-married, and their lineage can be traced back thousands of years. We know this. It is certainly true that the reptile/snake/lizard motif is unanimously represented in mythologies, religions and rituals in ALL cultures, irrespective of their place in history and geographic location, as the figure that ‘giveth and taketh away’. We know this. It is certainly true that an average of two thousand three hundred children EVERY DAY in the US alone, vanishing between one footstep and the next. We know this. It is certainly true that after WWII, the largest genocide in known human history, one topic of discussion at the 1945 Yalta conference – also the largest peacetime mobilization of military and world leadership in human history – was human over-population. This same topic then found its way into UN meetings and continues to dominate global strategy to the present day. We know this. We have the minutes of these meetings. We have the published documents from these meetings, detailing aims and deadlines, available for public dissemination. We know this. It is certainly true, if you point a pair of night-vision goggles up at a clear night sky, there is stuff flying around that you can’t call a satellite or weather balloon (as in, making right hand turns at high speeds, star-wars style combat etc.) We know this, the footage is available, and you can prove it to yourself if you and some friends split the bill for military grade goggles. None of these are secrets or theories, all of the above do not have evidence as mere support, they are foregone conclusions at this point. Despite all the above, the story of the reptile people is mere entertainment for me. Until I see a thirty-foot reptile male (or female, I hear their society is matriarchal), running around downtown, I cannot apply credence to this concept. Therefore, it does not shock me.
   What does really SHOCK me, as in makes my hair stand up on end and makes my stomach turn every time I think about it, is what happens at every ATM, every bank, in the transaction between every credit card, in the economic policy meeting of every government…
The ‘money’ of the world is written into governments’ electronic account by a central bank as a loan. This money is then owed back to a central bank at interest. Yet, since only the central bank has the power to issue money, the money to pay the interest on the loan can only come from the central bank! The result is that all money – in its present form – by its very existence, guarentees a self-perpetuating indebtedness to a central bank. Thus, through indebtedness, any government can be appropriated by a central bank. A very select, unelected minority has the power to direct government policy, and so shape the course of human history. It does not matter who you vote for! The central bank decides the issuance of credit, and thus the prosperity of a nation, not your elected official! Please note, if this is the first time you’ve heard of this, refrain from calling it a ‘conspiracy theory’. Please don’t clump central banking policy – which is utterly verifiable – in with the ‘blood-sucking reptile’ stuff. I know, for something so basic – a child could understand it – this important yet simple dynamic of the creation of money has been curiously missed out of the school curriculum and the jargon-filled mainstream media. Hmmm. Is this why we still, after all this time, are utterly dependent on this system? Instead of simply deciding to run with something different, a system that guarentees our independence from a usurping minority? Why have the mechanics of money-creation survived for so long? Why has it been so successful in shaping the world in which we live? How have we let an unelected minority effectively decide the velocity of money, its worth, what it can buy, and thus, whether we starve or not? Just as a heads up, the urgency in the discussion is underpinned by the fact that central banks are in the process of debasing your currency at this very moment!
   I would like to suggest, given the money system’s extreme efficiency in directing government policy, the wars that are fought, the food that can be eaten, and the medicines that can be taken, that its survival is dependent upon human innocence to it. I would like to suggest the very fact that it could be instigated in the first place and continued to this day, suggests that this innocence is somewhat innate in the human being. I would like to suggest, that knowing how humans can be tricked would imply a higher understanding of humanity than humanly possible! I would like to suggest, speculatively of course, that the inventors of this system (it did not just pop into view accidently, it has been authored, and those authors can be verified also) fit my definition of Evil, by the fact that humanity has remained largely oblivious to its mechanics and consequences. Until now, of course…

LIFE

Something is wrong.
Instagram token error.
Load More

NEWSLETTER

Copyright 2019 Tom Badley.
All Rights reserved.